Up in Smoke: $165,440.50 In Fees and Costs. Tenant suffered an adverse summary judgment on certain contract claims, with the lower court awarding landlord $165,440.50 in fees and costs as the prevailing party. That all went POOF! on appeal inn Kagan v. Zablen, Case No. B242437 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 5, […]
Trial Court Made Proper Allocation, and Chavez Was Dispositive Case Law. Defendants appealed a trial court’s award of $143,861.87 in attorney’s fees to a plaintiff winning $22,625 on sexual harassment, assault and battery claims after a bench trial, even though plaintiff lost other claims and plaintiff’s fees were three times more that the
Trial Court Lacked Jurisdiction to Impose Discovery Sanctions. In Ayala v. Gutierrez, Case No. B243006 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 3, 2013) (unpublished), defendants filed a motion for leave to file a cross-complaint and a motion to compel discovery (including a request for sanctions) against plaintiff. Before the motions were heard, plaintiff dismissed
Employee’s Indemnity Request Under Labor Code Section 2802 Only Garnered Employee $1,908 In Fees/Costs Out Of Requested $807,421.22 In Defense Fees/Costs. Labor Code section 2802 provides that an employer shall indemnify his or her employee for all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his
We would like to thank NALFA for providing posts on the following topics of interest, which we summarize. Governor Jerry Brown Signs SB 462 Into Law–Employers’ “Bad Faith” Burden. On August 26, 2013, California Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 462 into law. This amended Labor Code section 218.5 provides that persons other
Fee Clauses Not Broad Enough to Support Tort Claim Wins, So Case Remanded to Fix Fees And Determine If Any Apportionment Necessary. Brown Bark III, L.P. v. Haver, Case No. G047198 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 26, 2013) (unpublished) involved a defendant alleged to be the continuation of a defunct defendant signatory to
No Insurance Company Exception for Award of Interpleader Fees/Costs Under CCP § 386.6(a). CCP § 386.6(a) permits a court to award discretionary attorney’s fees and costs to a neutral stakeholder interpleading moneys or funds with the Court if interpleader procedures are followed. This section was at issue in Farmers New World Life Ins.
CCP § 527.6 Allows Court to Award Fees to Prevailing Party. In Narog v. Claybaugh, Case No. A131782 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 29, 2013) (unpublished), plaintiff filed a restraining order petition against neighbor defendant, who responded by seeking a declaration that plaintiff was a vexatious litigant and should have to post a
A lot of press was generated about George Zimmerman’s criminal case, where he was acquitted last month of the charge he murdered Trayvon Martin. Now, Mr. Zimmerman’s attorney Mark O’Mara has aired his view that Florida should pay all of Mr. Zimmerman’s estimated $2 millon in defense fees. As a start, Mr. O’Mara
City Ignored or Misrepresented Controlling Authorities on Appeal. In City of Santa Rosa v. Villages at Wild Oak Assn., Case No. A134107 (lst Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 28, 2013) (unpublished), City appealed the denial of its SLAPP motion. Bad move. In its moving papers below, City ignored or misrepresented controlling authorities. The appellate
