Author name: Marc Alexander

Probate: Leader II Reverses And Remands Fee Award To Beneficiaries Under Probate Code Section 17211(b) For Presentation Of New Evidence By Trustee On Bad Faith Issue

Cases: Probate

  Trial Court Erred in Not Allowing New Proof After Prior Reversal in Leader I.      In our March 24, 2010 post, we discussed Leader v. Cords, 182 Cal.App.4th 1588 (2010) (Leader I), where the appellate court reversed a probate code order denying Probate Code section 17211(b) fees to beneficiaries who were petitioning for an […]

Appeal/Equity: Maintenance Expenses/Fee Award In Partition/Quiet Title Action Was Affirmed Because Appellant Had Failed to Appeal Postjudgment Award On The Issue.

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Equity

  Result Was Dismissal of the Appeal.      Reedy v. Bussell, Case No. D059378 (4th Dist., Div. 1 July 26, 2012) (unpublished) was a situation where a trust beneficiary appealed maintenance expenses and attorney’s fees awarded to a trustee after a lower court order found that the expenditures were for the common benefit of the

Employment: Attorney’s Fees Recovery Not Permitted Where Plaintiff Employee Winning Labor Commissioner Award Against Employer Had Appeal Dismissed As Untimely On Jurisdictional Grounds

Cases: Employment, Cases: POOF!

  To Be Unsuccessful on Appeal, Employee Must Have Merits Tried By Superior Court And Besieged With a Zero Award.      Labor Code section 98.2(c) is a one-way fee shifting provision that penalizes an unsuccessful party who appeals a labor commissioner’s decision, mandating that the court assess attorney’s fees upon the unsuccessful appealing party. In

Probate: Attorney Representing Petition In Conservatorship Proceeding Entitled to Fee Award Under Probate Code Section 2640.1 And Equitable Grounds

Cases: Probate

  Conservatorship Was Established, But Equity Supported Award As Well.      No one in Conservatorship of Zilberstein, Case No. B23420 (2d Dist., Div. 7 July 25, 2012) (unpublished) argued that granddaughter did not have good intentions in filing a conservatorship petition for her grandmother given some suggestion that her two children were unduly influencing the

Consumer Statutes/Section 998: Song-Beverly Warranty Act Acceptor of 998 Offer Garners Significant Attorney Fees and Costs Award

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Section 998

  No Judgment Needed and Dismissal With Prejudice Sufficient to Shift Fees and Costs Under Song-Beverly Act Scheme.      The Fifth District in Wohlgemuth v. Caterpillar, Inc., Case No. F061981 (5th Dist. July 23, 2012) (partially published) answered some interesting questions about the nature of Code of Civil Procedure section 998 fee-shifting in the context

Private Attorney General: Whitley’s Nonpecuniary Interest Analysis Applies As Well In Public Enforcement Actions Where Municipal Entity Is CEQA Winner

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Whitley Not Limited to Private Enforcement Actions.      City of Maywood v. L.A. Unified School Dist., Case Nos. B233739/B236408 (2d Dist., Div. 7 July 18, 2012) (partially published; fee discussion published) involved a municipality which won a CEQA writ proceeding challenging a final environmental impact report relating to a high school project, notwithstanding that

Scroll to Top