“Public Interest” Argument by Defense Was Not Frivolous. In Albanese v. Menounos, Case No. B240866 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 7, 2013) (published), plaintiff defeated a defense SLAPP motion on the basis no public interest was involved. Although the determination was affirmed on appeal, plaintiff requested fees from the appellate court because the […]
Also Sustains Awarding $176,900 To Same Counsel’s Staff For Work Effort, And Remands For Consideration Of Costs Request Appellate Court Finds that Paralegals Do Not Necessarily Have to Meet California B&P Educational/Certification Requirements in Order to Obtain Compensation. This next case, Ellis v. Toshiba America Information System, Inc. (Sklar), Case Nos. B220286/B227078 (2d
Simply Losing Fair Use Defense Did Not Means Fees Were Automatic. Seltzer v. Green Day, Inc., Case No. 11-56573 (9th Cir. Aug. 7, 2013) (for publication) is a case where defendants’ win based on a fair use defense in a copyright infringement case was affirmed. However, the district court also awarded the defense
$97,145.71 Fee Award Out of Requested $488,521.45 Fees/Costs Request Was the Ultimate Result. The next case illustrates how appellate courts will avoid having to decide the clashing interests of two statutes if they can decide that the lower court showed equitable discretion so as to moot any decision on the “clash.” Overland
SLAPP Work Benefiting Non-Attorney and Attorney Defendants Was Okay, As Long As a True “Co-Benefit.” In Klinger v. Alderete, Case No. B245403 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 6, 2013) (unpublished), both non-attorney and attorney parties obtained a SLAPP dismissal of a malicious prosecution action. Then, all of the winning defendants were awarded attorney’s
Oral Reprimand This falls in the “you can’t this stuff up” category, as reported by Martha Nell in an August 1, 2013 post in the on-line version of The ABA Journal. A suburban Philadelphia lawyer had his license suspended by the Pennsylvania State Bar for 1 year. Doesn’t sound that remarkable. Reason? He
Roadmap Provided in Citigroup Ins. Securities Class Action Settlement. U.S. District Judge Sidney H. Stein, in In re Citigroup Ins. Sec. Litig., 87 Civ. 9901 (SHS) (S.D.N.Y. 8/1/13 Doc. 275), has provided a nice “roadmap” for deciding issues that frequently come up when district judges consider class action plantiffs’ attorneys’ fee requests.
California Federal Filing Dip Bucks National Trend Otherwise. According to the Federal Judicial Center, federal wage/hour lawsuit filings–which have steadily increased on a nationwide basis in the last few years–actually are down in California almost 50% in 2013 so far. Some legal experts have opined that the filings are down due to (1)
State Supreme Court Clarifies UCL Reach On Insurance Bad Faith Actions, Including A Footnote On Fee Recovery. In Zhang v. Superior Court, Case No. S178542 (Cal. Supreme Court Aug. 1, 2013), our state supreme court held that common law bad faith insurances cases can be pled and sustained as unfair competition law claims,
. . . And What Percentage Goes to Attorney’s Fees and Costs. For you readers that are involved in Proposition 65 settlements, we commend you to Bruce Nye’s July 16, 2013 post at his Cal Biz Lit blog. He reports that historically for the past few years, attorney’s fees and costs constitute
