NBC Poll Shows Public Sentiment Is Against This Request. As reported July 30, 2013 by the San Diego Channel 7 (NBC) blog, San Diego mayor Bob Filner has asked the City to cover his legal fees for a sexual harassment suit brought by former employees (with Gloria Allred being the attorney who is […]
Defendants lost a sales commission dispute against a plaintiff under the Independent Wholesale Sales Representatives Contractual Relations Act, Civ. Code, § 1738.10 et seq., which has a mandatory fee-shifting provision in favor of a prevailing party (§ 1738.16). Plaintiff then won an unopposed fee award of $113,841.10. The award was affirmed in
More Extended Three Years Limitations Period Does Not Apply Unless Asset Was Unadjudicated or Omitted from Marital Division Judgment. Here is an interesting one in the family law area, involving claims that ex-husband contingency attorney concealed his true interest in a contingency split for multi-millions in fees to securities attorneys handling the Enron
Because Contingency Related to Work for Beneficiaries Apart from Estate Benefits, No Compliance Necessary With Probate Code Court Approval Requirements. Okay, readers, here is an interesting cross-over case involving probate, retainer agreements, and contingency awards. The case is Sare v. Shad, Case No. C069573 (3d Dist. July 31, 2013) (unpublished). In this
Neither One Obtained Sought-After Litigation Objectives. When a lower court has discretion to decide who the prevailing party is, unless the facts show otherwise, the abuse of discretion generally applies on appellate review and dictates the result. That is what happened here. In Barez v. Ni, Case No. H037572 (6th Dist. July
Because District Judge Had Already Ruled on FBI’s Compliance, So No Rule 11 Sanctions Would Lie. Ya know, timing is everything; life in general, but especially in the law. The next case demonstrates the truth of this saying in real life time, all in the context of Rule 11 sanctions. Islamic Shura
According to Law.com, the Survey of Law Firm Economics showed firms with more than 150 attorneys had an 8.5% increase in revenues per attorney this year as compared with the same period through third quarter 2012. However, firms or offices with 1-9 attorneys saw revenue decrease 8% over the same time frame.
Trope Rule Dictated the Result. In Legaspi v. Spivak, Case No. B240274 (2d Dist., Div. 4 July 30, 2013) (unpublished), a lower court denied attorney’s fees to winning SLAPP defendants (all attorneys or law firms) based on theTrope rule barring self-represented lawyers from recovering fees. The fee denial was affirmed on appeal.
Government Code Section 21167(f) Was Basis For Reduction. In San Diego Citizenry Group v. County of San Diego, Case No. D059962 (4th Dist., Div. 1 July 30, 2011) (unpublished), losing CEQA plaintiff did challenge the costs of preparing part of an administrative record and argued the County was not entitled to reimbursement of
SLAPP Reversal Doomed Prior Fee Award Viability. Reversal on appeal can be cruel in any case, but especially in the SLAPP context. Renewable Resources Coalition, Inc. v. Pebble Mines Corp., Case Nos. B234347/B236218 (2d Dist., Div. 3 July 30, 2013) (published) is a good illustration. There, a SLAPP grant in favor of
