Author name: Marc Alexander

In The News . . . . Apple Seeks Recovery Of Over $15.7 Million Of Attorneys’ Fees And $6.2 Million In Legal Expenses From Samsung Entities In Patent War Battle

In The News

     Photo:  Wikipedia.  Author: Abhijit Tembhekar. Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.      Apple, Inc. hired two law firms, and paid them $62 million, in well-publicized patent litigation against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and two Samsung affiliates, with Apple winning its case to the tune of around $930 million in damages. Now, in a request to […]

Family Law: Denial Of Ex-Wife’s Request For Needs-Based Fees Reversed

Cases: Family Law

  Records Did Not Reflect Lower Court Considered Needs-Based Factors.      In Marriage of Kokoszka, Case No. E056727 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Dec. 10, 2013) (unpublished), the issue was whether the record established that the lower court properly considered the needs-based factor in denying a fee award to ex-wife in a family law case.     

News . . . . Orange County Water District Has Spent $22.4 Million Of $30 Settlements Collected In Contamination Lawsuits On Legal Costs/Expert Fees/Attorney’s Fees And N.D. California District Judge Slashes Class Counsel Fee Request In Acer America

In The News

  OCWD Tally of Legal Costs/Fees Versus Settlements.      In Teri Sforza’s December 8, 2013 article in The Orange County Register, she reports that the Orange County Water District, which was sued businesses over alleged drinking water contamination throughout the last decade, has collected about $30 million in settlements. Where did the money go? Ms.

SLAPP/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees/Billing Records: Lower Court Did Not Err In Fashioning Three Fee Awards To Three Winning Defendants Successfully SLAPPing A Malicious Prosecution Action

Cases: Billing Record Substantiation, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Trial Judge Reduced Requests Substantially Due to Severely Redacted Billing Records and General Supporting Attorney Declaration; Further Reductions Not Justified.      Three defendants (as well as their law firms) sought mandatory fee awards after SLAPPing plaintiff’s malicious prosecution action in Du Boise v Peterson, Case Nos. B237764/B240357 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Dec. 6, 2013)

In The News . . . . U.S. House Of Representative Okays “Patent Troll” Restriction Bill And 39% Of Law Firm Leaders Predict Flat/Decreased Profits For 2013

In The News

  “Patent Trolls” Legislation Passes House.      As reported by a December 6, 2013 article in The Orange County Register, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Innovation Act having restrictions against “patent trolls,” patent assertion entitles who do not manufacture inventions but sue putative defendant infringer targets. Among other things, the bill modifies the

Allocation/Fee Clause Interpretation/Prevailing Party: Broadly-Worded Fees Clause Allowed For Recovery Of Fees On Noncontract Claims Following Voluntary Dismissal In Wake Of Pleading Motions

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Fee Motion Properly Filed and No Allocation Between Claims Required.      Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its contract-based/tortious interference case against one defendant without prejudice in the wake of pending pleading motions, with the trial court determining that fully requested fees of $16,926 were due to prevailing defendant.      Plaintiff’s multi-pronged attack in Oxnard Corner, LLC

Private Attorney General Statute: Director’s Mandate Win By Which She Successfully Beat Exclusion From Board Meeting Of Nonprofit Organization Did Not Impact The Public Interest

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Catalyst Theory is No Alternative, Because Mandate Win Was Judicial Determination.      A director of a nonprofit public benefit corporation involving horses for disabled students successfully won a mandate proceeding in court by which she beat the board’s attempt to exclude her from a board meeting. She then moved for recovery of private attorney

Appealability: Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Plan Confirmation Order Did Not Preclude Plaintiff From Challenging Trial Court Fees/Costs Award

Cases: Appealability

  Res Judicata Effect of Confirmed Chapter 13 Plan Is Limited.      Edwards v. Broadwater Casitas Care Center, Case No. B247596 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Dec. 5, 2013) (published) decided that a plaintiff could appeal a trial court’s adverse fees and costs order of $158,471.25 and $19,836, respectively, despite the confirmation of a chapter 13

Civil Rights: Ninth Circuit Sustains Most Of District Judge’s Decision To Award Civil Rights Plaintiff, Who Only Had Limited Success On Gender Discrimination Claim, $697,971.80 In Fees Where $27,280 Recouped In Damages

Cases: Civil Rights

  Paralegal Fee Award Was Remanded Based on Consideration of Hearsay Evidence; 10% Lodestar Reduction for Inflated Hours Was No Abuse of Discretion.      Plaintiff won a gender discrimination claim against UPS, after losing other claims, under California’s state FEHA statute, which has a pro-plaintiff fee shifting claim. Plaintiff then requested FEHA claims in the

Allocation/Costs/Prevailing Party: Wine Cellar Gets Hit With $28,659.50 Contract Damages Plus Prejudgment Interest PLUS $36,061.50 In Contractual Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Costs, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Plaintiff Got Unqualified Win, With No Apportionment Needed; Two Winning Defendants Failed To Timely File For Costs.      This case stirred our curiosity, because it involves Veris Cellars, which appears to be a very nice winery located in the Paso Robles area in San Luis Obispo County. However, no matter who the litigant, beware

Scroll to Top