Author name: Marc Alexander

Bankruptcy/Fee Clause Interpretation: Broadly Worded Fees Clause Rescues The Day For Winning Creditor

Cases: Bankruptcy Efforts, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

CCP § 1021, Not Civil Code § 1717, Afforded Relief.     In re Charalambous (Hamilton v. Charalambous), BAP No. CC-13-1042-PDKi (BAP 9th Cir. Mem. Decision July 3, 2013) (unpublished) is an illustration of how one needs to carefully pick the basis for fee entitlement. Although Civil Code section 1717 is an attractive first impulse ground, […]

In the News . . . . 2013 Attorney Hourly rates Are On The Rise, But Clients Are Getting Discounts And Billing/Collection Differential Has Increased

Rates

       Co-contributors Marc and Mike thank Mike’s father-in-law Tom Basehart for sharing an interesting April 10, 2013 article from The Wall Street Journal (authored by Jennifer Smith) which provides some insights into rising attorney billing rates and client reactions to such a trend.      Here are the highlights from this article:      *”Star” partners

Allocation/Lodestar/Reasonableness Of Fees: Former Employee Losing Wage/Hour Claims Hit With $150,519.36 Adverse Fee Award

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Hourly Rates by Defense Were Reasonable; No Apportionment Required.      Plaintiff, a former employee, sued defendant former employer for unpaid commissions, vacation time, and unreimbursed expenses, requesting an award of attorney’s fees upon prevailing under Labor Code sections 218.5 and 218.6 (wage/hour fee-shifting provisions). Plaintiff brought four causes of action, one of which was

Arbitration/Prevailing Party: Because Motion To Compel Arbitration In Pending Lawsuit Is Not An “Action” Under Civil Code Section 1717, Attorney’s Fees Award To Successful Compelling Party Was Premature

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Second District, Division One Disagrees With Contrary Conclusion Reached by First District, Division Two in Kors.      After plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against their former attorneys, those attorneys successfully moved to compel arbitration in the pending lawsuit, with the lower court also awarding them $67,930.50 in attorney’s fees as the prevailing party in the

Reasonableness Of Fees: 40% Vaguely Explained Reduction Did Not Pass Muster Before Ninth Circuit In Civil Rights Case

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Simply Saying Fees “Excessive” Was Not Enough.      In Barnard v. Theobald, Case No. 11-16625 (9th Cir. July 1, 2013) (for publication), the Ninth Circuit affirmed an excessive police force jury verdict against defendants. However, it vacated a district judge’s decision to reduce requested attorney’s fees under the federal civil rights statute (42 U.S.C.

Sanctions: $5,076 Sua Sponte CCP § 128.7 Fee Sanctions Order Reversed For Three Reasons–Inadequate Notice, Lack Of Bad Faith, And Ordering Payment to Defendant

Cases: Sanctions

  Civility Would Have Likely Averted the Whole Dispute, With Santa Ana Appellate Court Emphasizing Cooperation Rather Than Continued Litigation.      This is an interesting sanctions case, rife with cogent interminglings of discussions on the need for civility rather than continued litigation aggression when a transparent, inadvertent error was made during the course of a

Costs/Section 998: Winning 998 Winner Did Not Have To Allocate Costs Among “Lockstep” Plaintiffs In Costs Memorandum Where Plaintiffs Were Represented By Same Attorney

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 998

  Apportionment May Be Required In Response to Motion to Tax Costs, But Trial Court Erred By Not Allowing Allocation After Raising Apportionment Objection Sua Sponte.      Justice Bedsworth, for a 3-0 panel, held in Morris v. Wilson, Case No. G047534 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 20, 2013) (unpublished) that a defendant is not required

Prevailing Party: Dismissal Of Entire Contractual Cause Of Action, Including Individual Counts Within A Cause Of Action, Meant No Fee Recovery Before Adjudication On The Merits

Cases: Prevailing Party

       Tiso v. Stier, Case No. D060061 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 20, 2013) (unpublished) involved a pre-trial, formal dismissal of a reformation count where a Civil Code section 1717 fee clause was potentially in play. The appellate court, in reversing a fee award, determined that the dismissal of the reformation cause of action,

Costs/Indemnity: Off-Campus Float Dispute Summary Judgment Meant No Fee Indemnity Exposure And Costs Were Properly Awarded to School District As The “Prevailing” Cross-Defendant

Cases: Costs, Cases: Indemnity

       Cauzza v. Julian Union High School Dist., Case No. D060364 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 18, 2013) (unpublished) is a great case for you educational practitioners on the law and type of proof to demonstrate a school district’s liability or non-liability for off-campus homecoming float activities. In the end, school district prevailed on

Scroll to Top