Author name: Marc Alexander

Private Attorney General: Marijuana Dispensary, Winning At Pleading Stage, Did Not Win Ultimate Litigation Objective To Prevent City From Closing Dispensary

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Dispensary Was Not Successful Under CCP § 1021.5, Ultimately.      In Qualified Patients Assn. v. City of Anaheim, Case No. G046875 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 29, 2013) (unpublished), a former medical marijuana dispensary lost an attempt to recoup attorney’s fees under the private atttorney general statute. Although dispensary won at the pleading stage, […]

Arbitration/Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Interesting Cross-Issue Case–Party Enjoining Arbitration Was Not Adverse Prevailing Party

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Court Can Award 1717 Fees With Enforceable Limitations–Such As, Did Adverse Party Acted Arbitrarily, Vexatiously, In Bad Faith Or Unreasonably–You Bethca!      We like Abbey v. Fortune Drive Associates, LLC, Case No. A135062 (1st Dist., Div. 1 July 29, 2013) (unpublished) for a lot, if not a couple of, reasons: (1) it talks about

Off Topic: 25 Greatest Law Novels Ever; Judge Chastises Plaintiff Attorneys Suing For Internet Downloading; Wage/Hour Claims Increase In Federal Court Since 2008; Pre-Law Students Have Different Expectations For Using Law Degree

Off Topics

  ABA List of 25 Greatest Law Novels.      The August 2013 issue of The ABA Journal list these as the 25 greatest law novels ever (actually 26, because 25 drew a tie between two books): 25. (tie) Old Filth by Jane Gardam (2004) 25. (tie) The Ox-Bow Incident by Walter Van Tilburg Clark (1940)

Estoppel/RFAs/Section 1717: Denial Of Fees To Nonsignatory Defendants And $45,000 Against Defendants For “Costs Of Proof” Sanctions Based On Three RFA Denials Upheld

Cases: Estoppel, Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Section 1717

  This Case Cuts Across Several Issue Categories. Two painted bronze “golfers” compare notes.  Carol M. Highsmith Collection.  Library of Congress.      Masters v. Burton, Case Nos. B234555/B239447 (2d Dist., Div. 6 July 25, 2013) (unpublished) is a case about errant golf balls and litigation claiming concealment of the golf ball “hazard” in connection with

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Fee Denial Remanded Because Trial Court Misunderstood The Law, Meaning Discretion Was Not Properly Exercised

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Fee Denial Occurred in Domestic Violence Civil Case.      Wife in Bolander v. Bolander, Case No. A134509 (1st Dist., Div. 2 July 25, 2013) (unpublished) recovered $405,000 is a civil domestic violence case arising from her claims of nonconsensual sexual conduct after her husband laced her wine with Ambien on two occasions. She then

Off Topic/Substantiation of Reasonableness Of Fees: But Not Really–Attorney Fee Billings In Non-Reasonableness of Fees Discovery Contexts Are Privileged

Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees, Off Topics

  State Court Decision Differs from Federal Opinions on the Topic.      Although this is maybe a little off topic, Walley v. Superior Court (Hoover), Case No. G048340 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 24, 2013) (unpublished) is an interesting writ proceeding where an attorney challenged a lower court order to disclose invoices and accounting documents

Family Law: $120,000 Sanctions Properly Entered Against Husband Based On Both Family Code Sections 2107(c) And 271

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

  No Injury Required to Opposing Party Under Section 2107(c).      A lower court in Marriage of Young, Case No. B234768 (2d Dist., Div. 6 July 23, 2013) (unpublished) decided that a husband, after four years of “active” litigation, should have to pay sanctions to wife of $120,000 under Family Code section 2107(c) [mandating candid

Civil Rights/Costs: Routine Costs, Not Including Attorney’s Fees Or Expert Witness Fees, Can Be Awarded Without Showing Loser’s Case Was Frivolous, Unreasonableness, Or Groundless

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs

  Fourth District, Division 2 Disagrees With Cummings.      In the civil rights area, Cummings v. Benco Building Services, 11 Cal.App.4th 1383, 1388 (1992) is a California decision oft-cited for the proposition that both fees and costs cannot be awarded against a losing civil rights plaintiff unless the action is deemed to be frivolous, unreasonable,

Section 998: Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice Confers Discretion On Trial Court To Shift Expert Witness Fee To Dismissing Party

Cases: Section 998

  “Judgment” Is Not A Necessary Predicate.      This next decision makes CCP § 998 an even more powerful tool, and we believe will engender some interesting reaction from other appellate courts.      Construing section 998, Mon Chong Loong Trading Corp. v. Superior Court, Case No. B240828 (2d Dist., Div. 3 July 23, 2013) (published)

Social Security: Attorney’s Fees Award Under EAJA Erroneously Decided Because ALJ’s Decision Is “Position of the United States” For Determining If Government Was Substantially Justified In Its Position

Cases: Social Security

  Remand Was Ordered to Consider $15,000-Plus Fee Request.      In Meier v. Colvin, Case No. 11-35736 (9th Cir. July 23, 2013) (for publication), a social security disability benefits claimant suffered defeats at the administrative law level and the district court level, until the the Ninth Circuit in an earlier unpublished memorandum opinion reversed and

Scroll to Top