As reported by Martha Neil in her September 25, 2013 post in the on-line version of the ABA Journal, plaintiffs’ lawyer Terry Silva was awarded $50,418.75 in attorney’s fees and costs (including $1,743.75 for “fees on fees”) in a successful civil rights suit she and other plaintiffs pursed since 2010 over the wrongful […]
Appellate Court Did Not Find Unenforceability, But Framed A Choice Based on Unequal Bargaining Leverage. Our local Santa Ana appellate court, in a 3-0 decision authored by Justice Rylaarsdam, has sent a message in our opinion about attorney retainer agreements containing mandatory arbitration provisions. Roldan v. Callahan & Blaine, Case No. G047306 (4th
Also, Hong Kong Law Was Consonant With California Reciprocity Law on Fees. Dampier v. Solar & Environmental Technologies Corp. (SETC), Case No. G045805 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 8, 2013) (unpublished) (authoring justice: Justice Rylaarsdam), involves a case which co-contributors Marc and Mike were involved in, up to right before the
Pretty Much a Discretionary Apportionment Process, Concludes DCA In This One. Anyone following our blog (blawg–someone needs to explain the difference to me, although co-contributor Marc is the likely culprit or victim who will do so) will know that apportionment/allocation of fees in fee entitlement areas is a discretionary function where some claims
No “Magic Language” of Acceptance Required. From our own local Santa Ana appellate court, CCP § 998 jurisprudence gained an important case in the form of Puerta v. Torres, 195 Cal.App.4th 1267 (2011), which requires some provision to allow the offeree to indicate acceptance of the offer by signing a statement that the
$6,000 Aggregate Sanctions for Three Separate Discovery Motions Did Not Meet $5,000 Minimum Appellate Threshold. In order to be appealable, an order imposing a monetary sanction must exceed $5,000. (Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1(a)(12).) However, what happens when a litigant appeals a $6,000 reduced sanctions award where the opponent filed three separate discovery
No “Magic Language” of Acceptance Required. From our own local Santa Ana appellate court, CCP § 998 jurisprudence gained an important case in the form of Puerta v. Torres, 195 Cal.App.4th 1267 (2011), which requires some provision to allow the offeree to indicate acceptance of the offer by signing a statement that the
Lender TILA Duty of Care and Anti-Steering Prohibition Violations Will Trigger Civil Liability. Passed earlier this year, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act directed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to issue rules to establish stronger protections for residential homeowners facing foreclosures (but not involving HELOCs). THE CFPB has done
$181,933 “Generous” Fee Award Not Out of Bounds. LA Open Door Presbyterian Church v. Evangelical Christian Credit Union, Case No. B246853 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 4, 2013) (unpublished) is a situation where a defendant was voluntarily dismissed from a suit involving a contract (a written forbearance agreement with a fees clause). Although
Appellant Did Not Present Adequate Record for Review. Ex-husband likely was not pleased with getting hit with an $876,000 attorney’s fees award to reimburse his ex-wife for fees she had to incur in defending herself in a lawsuit caused by his alleged fraudulent operation of a construction business. So, he appealed in Marriage
