Allocation of Costs Between Defendants Is Not Mandatory Under Section 998. In Hundal v. Singh, Case No. C071873 (3d Dist. Sept. 24, 2013) (unpublished), plaintiffs lost a car accident case against defendants, after sharply conflicting testimony in which the jury went with plaintiffs as far as negligence but found for the defense based […]
998 Accepted Offer Was $40,000, Chagrined Plaintiff Denied Requested $225,750 In Fees. Care of Justice Yegan and his colleagues in the Second District, Division 6, we have an interesting CCP § 998/Civil Code § 1717 decision in The DuPuis Group v. Atticus Information Systems, Inc., Case No. B242722 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Sept.
2/7 DCA So Rules In Published Decision. Swanson v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., Case No. B240016 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 23, 2013) (published) addressed this narrow but important issue for California insurance coverage practitioners: Does an insurer withdrawing all reservations of right and coverage defenses have to continue paying insured’s Cumis
2.0 Multiplier Enhancement Was Justified. In Molina v. Lexmark International, Inc., Case Nos. B227746 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 19, 2013) (unpublished), an employer suffered a $7,777,620 adverse amended judgment in a class action involving employer’s vacation policy violations of Labor Code section 227.3. The lower court also awarded plaintiffs $145,341.93
“Contest” To An Accounting To Be Read Liberally Under Probate Code Section 17211(b). In Estate of Wizel, Case No. B237990 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 16, 2013) (unpublished), trustee–who was eventually found to have breached his duties–filed an original accounting which was objected to by some trust beneficiaries. Trustee filed a supplement to
“Be Careful What You Ask For” Is the Theme Here, Despite a Reversal of Fortune. Image 2000 Multimedia, Inc. v. Quinn, Case No. D061776 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 16, 2013) (unpublished) is a classic example of “be careful for what you ask for” during the case where there is a sudden reversal
Attaching Settlement Agreement to Demurrer Saved Former Client on Appeal. In DeGenarro v. Geiger & Merritt, LLP, Case No. G047461 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 13, 2013) (unpublished), fired, former law firm sued client for unpaid fees. Client and old firm signed a settlement agreement, with client serving old law firm with an
National Jurist List of Best-Value Private Law Schools — 2012 Graduates. According to a September 9, 2013 post by Debra Cassens Weiss in the on-line version of the ABA Journal, National Jurist has announced its list of top best-value private law schools, in order of priority and with assigned “grades” in relation to
Alter Ego and Kindred Successor Theories Treated Alike Under Section 1717. We reported on Brown Bark III v. Haver, Case No. G047198 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 26, 2013) (unpublished) in our September 2, 2013 post, where a fee denial was reversed with respect to a prevailing defendant alleged to be the successor
Issue Is Whether Prevailing Homeowner Entitled To Civil Code Section 1354 Fees When HOA Found Not To Be A CID. On May 16, 2013, we posted on the unpublished Second District decision of Tract 19051 Homeowners Assn. v. Kemp, Case No. B235015 (2d Dist., Div. 4 May 15, 2013). In this decision, the
