No Common Benefit Was Secured. In Gentino v. Yaghoobia, Case No. B321102 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 12, 2023) (unpublished), plaintiff was defensed by a single defendant in a case alleging that plaintiff had a 50% ownership interest in a Long Beach property, with one of the claims being for partition. Defendant moved for […]
Partial Fee Request Granted Because Plaintiff’s Counsel Admitted Prosecution Of The Case Successfully Was Not Possible At A Definite Point In The Case. Under 42 U.S.C. §1988, a district judge, in his or her discretion, may award attorney’s fees to a prevailing defendant where the court finds plaintiff’s claims to be frivolous, unreasonableness, or
Parsing Out Unsuccessful Work And Assessing Satisfaction Of Litigation Objectives Had To Be Considered On Remand. In Berry v. Pope Valley Union Elementary School Dist., Case No. A165592 (1st Dist., Div 3 Oct. 10, 2023) (unpublished), defendant District SLAPPed plaintiff’s amended complaint, while another defendant SLAPPed all but one whistleblower claim. The defendants respectively
Case Demonstrates That Enforcement Fees May Eclipse The Underlying Small Fee Award By Exponential Amounts. In Nash v. Aprea, Case No. B322796 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Oct. 3, 2023) (published), a default judgment of $59,191 was entered against defendant, with $1,000 of that being contractual attorney’s fees because the contract capped recoverable fees at
2/3 DCA Agreed With The Reasoning In Karton. More and more, we are seeing appellate opinions, whether published or not, stressing the need for civility among attorneys in litigation cases. In fact, there are proposals being considered which would require that California attorneys, annually, have to reaffirm their oath and to confirm they will
CCP § 1021.4 Was The Fee Shifting Statute. Isom v. MacCarthy, Case No. B317433 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 2, 2023) (unpublished) involved application of CCP § 1021.4, which allows a court in its discretion to award attorney’s fees to a prevailing tort plaintiff as against a defendant who is convicted of a felony
Result Was That The Total Fee Request Of The Defense Should Have Been Awarded, Not The Scaled Down Order For 80% Of The Request. In Ross v. Seyfarth Shaw LLP, Case No. B312337 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Sept. 29, 2023) (unpublished), plaintiff brought a suit based primarily on the alleged shoddiness of a CSU
Lender Elected Its Judicial Foreclosure Remedy, With Borrower Not Being Assessed With Fees And Costs. Lender must not be pleased with the result in Transition Financial Services, LLC v. Wintrust Bank, Case Nos. A162930 et al. (1st Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 29, 2023) (unpublished). Lender obtained a judicial foreclosure judgment for the amount of
Justice Wiley, In Concurring, Shows Why This Is A Necessary Result Given Public Discontent About The Costs Of Modern Litigation. I guess one could say that Marriage of Andrew and Rangell, Case No. B313786 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Sept. 28, 2023) (published) is simply an affirmance, primarily, of Family Code section 271 sanctions award
We Quote The Successful Language Below. In Leung v. Alivandivafa, Case No. B323416 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 26, 2023) (unpublished), attorney won a fee dispute with a client after a lower court determined that the governing contingency agreement was valid. The lower court then awarded prevailing attorney $98,250 in fees, reducing the requested
