Author name: Marc Alexander

In the News

In The News

Flonase Class Action Counsel Win $50 Million In Fees, District Judge Selna Puts Hold On Fee Award To Toyota Unintended Acceleration Class Action Attorneys, N.Y. Bankruptcy Judge Approves $17 Million In Fees to Dewey & Lebouef’s Chapter 11 Attorneys, DOJ Approves New Larger Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Fee Guidelines, N.Y. Federal Judge Awards $40.7 Million to

Liens For Attorneys Fee/Retainer Agreement: Triable Issue Of Fact Required Reversal of Summary Judgment Where Evidence Demonstrated Existence Of Retainer Agreement Should Be Decided By Trier Of Fact

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  If Second Retainer Agreement Signed By Client, Attorneys Lien Did Exist.      Majlessi v. Parman, Case No. B241063 (2d Dist., Div. 3 July 12, 2013) (unpublished) is a case where the lower court granted summary judgment across the board when a discharged personal injury attorney sued successor attorneys to honor an attorneys’ lien in

In The News . . . . Virginia Attorney Pays $544,000 Facebook Discovery Fee Sanction; Toronto Attorney Left Ferrari In Flood Path To Get To Court Hearing; Ex-Sidley Austin Partner Fesses Up To Bogus $69,000 Cab Reimbursement Expense; McGeorge Law School En

In The News

       We would like to thank Martha Neil and Molly McDonough for some interesting posts on The ABA Journal’s online publication during July 9-11, 2013. Virginia Lawyer Fee Sanction Payment.      A Virginia attorney, facing ethics violations, paid his $544,000 share of a $722,000 legal fee award for advice relating to deactivation of Facebook

Costs/Specific Fee Shifting Statutes: Plaintiff Winning Challenge To Property Assessment On Narrow Grounds Not Entitled to Fees Under Specific Revenue & Taxation Code Sections

Cases: Costs, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Also, Plaintiff Cannot Receive Trial Expenses As Costs Based on Being Awarded Costs on Appeal from An Earlier Appeal.      Plaintiff property owner, in a prior published decision, obtained a trial court judgment affirmed on appeal in connection with a determination that the Nevada County Assessment Appeals Board failed to apply the correct burden

Appealability/Prevailing Party: Failure To Include Answer To Complaint And Opposition To Fee Motion Presented Inadequate Appellate Record To Review Fee Challenges

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Also, Plaintiff Only Obtained a “Mixed” Win Rather Than An “Unqualified” One.      In Chan v. Lo, Case No. B239783 (2d Dist., Div. 5 July 9, 2013) (unpublished), plaintiff obtained some relief (with the court determining she owed less than the face amount of a promissory note), but still was found to owe note

Appealability/Deadlines: Appellant Failed To Preserve Costs Challenges By Failing to Timely File From Original Judgment

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Deadlines

  Subsequent Judgment Was Not Materially Substantial So As To Trigger New Appeal Time Commencement.      Darden Painting, Inc. v. Glass Architects, Case No. A132846 (1st Dist., Div. 2 July 9, 2013) (unpublished) is a case where a litigant challenging certain costs ruling was pretty much shut out on procedural grounds–failure to timely appeal. What

Section 998: Lack Of Acceptance Language Was Fatal To 998 Offer Validity

Cases: Section 998

  Second District, Division 5 Follows Puerta.      Although not involving attorney’s fees, we report that the Second District, Division 5 in Boeken v. Philip Morris USA Inc., Case No. B236875 (2d Dist., Div. 5 July 9, 2013) (partially published) did follow Puerta v. Torres, 195 Cal.App.4th 1267, 1272 (2011), a Fourth District, Division 3

Costs/Lodestar/Multiplier/Section 998: $989,258 Plaintiff Fee Award Affirmed Under Bane Act

Cases: Costs, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Section 998

  Additional Costs Awards for Experts and Trial Technology Also Sustained.      In Bender v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. B236294 (2d Dist., Div. 8 July 9, 2013) (published), plaintiff won an excessive police force Bane Act suit, with the Bane Act containing a fee-shifting clause. The lower court also awarded $989,258 to plaintiff

Scroll to Top