Author name: Marc Alexander

Reasonableness Of Fees: $141,080 Fees For Plaintiff’s Attorneys Winning Labor Code Violations Sustained On Appeal

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Compensatory Award to Plaintiff Was A Little Over $56,000.      Just to be sure, plaintiffs winning certain Labor Code violations, even if the compensatory damages are small, can win exponentially greater attorney’s fees awards under plaintiff-friendly fee shifting statutes.      That occurred in Quiroz v. Emergency University, Case No. A137595 (1st Dist., Div. 2 […]

Private Attorney General Statute/Special Fee Shifting Statute: Optometrist Overturning ALJ Determination Against His Certificate Not Entitled To Fee Award Under Private Attorney General Statute Or Government Code Section 800

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  $80,000 Fee Award/$2,000 Costs Award Go POOF!        Artist:  Jean-Léon Gérôme.  1824 – 1904.      Optometrist had gotten a nice win–a superior court overturned an ALJ’s determination that the optometrist had violated the standard of care in relation to a patient’s cataracts diagnosis. The lower court then awarded optometrist about $80,000 in fees

Civil Rights: Civil Rights Plaintiffs Winning Some Claims To The Tune Of $128,230 In Damages Garnered Fees Of $1,283,629.18–Ten-Fold Increase

Cases: Civil Rights

  Court Rejects Needless Markup:  1.1 Multiplier Used, But Rejected $1,623,087 Lodestar/2.0 Multiplier Fees Request.      In civil rights cases, winning plaintiffs have liberally-oriented fee shifting statutes in play which can result in exponential fee awards as compared to fairly modest damages recoveries–that is how the statutory schemes at both federal and state levels operate.

Private Attorney General: Plaintiff Obtaining Earlier Published Decision On Stray Day Impounding Period Erroneously Denied CCP § 1021.5 Fees

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Remand to Fix Fees for Winning Plaintiff.      Plaintiff in Purifoy v. Howell, Case No. A135284 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 26, 2013) (unpublished) must    initially have been sorely disappointed when she was denied an award of attorney’s fees under the private attorney general statute after obtaining an earlier published appellate court decision which

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Lower Court’s Denial Of Fee Request To Prevailing Party Under California Public Records Act Reversed

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Motivation of Party Irrelevant; Negative Multiplier Was Abuse of Discretion.      In Guarino v. City of Fontana, Case No. E054357 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 26, 2013) (unpublished), plaintiff filed a request for documents with the City of Fontana under the California Above:  Fontana City Hall.  Author:  JWut89LA.  Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Public

Costs: Andreini & Co. Decision Now Published

Cases: Costs

  Opinion Deals With Whether Costs Of Borrowing Money To Post Appellate Deposit Are Recoverable By Winning Party And Whether CRC 8.278(d)(1)(F) Is Retroactive.      On September 15, 2013, we posted on Andreini & Co. v. MacCorkle Ins. Service, Inc., an opinion determining that a winning party’s costs of borrowing money to post an appellate

Family Law: Lower Court’s Failure To Consider Financial Factors On Merits Issues Bleed Through To The Fee Award

Cases: Family Law

  Reversal Required Because Family Judges Must Show They Weighed Financial Factors On The Record.      Marriage of Wood, Case No. G047509 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 24, 2013) (unpublished), a 3-0 decision authored by Justice Moore, is a reminder to family law practitioners to obtain judicial justification of discretionary “needs based” fees awards in

Scroll to Top