Part 2 of 4 [Links to Parts 1, 3 and 4] The second panel of the NALFA 2011 Attorney Fees Conference held on November 17, 2011 at Loyola Law School discussed “Class Action Litigation & Attorney Fee Awards,” consisting of panelists Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Carl J. West, Aashish Y. Desai […]
Part 1 of 4: “Attorney Fees in Prevailing Party Litigation” [Links to Parts 2, 3 and 4] National Association of Legal Fee Analysis (NALFA), through the coordination of Executive Director Terry Jesse, held the 2011 Attorney Fees Conference at Loyola Law School on November 17, 2011. There were four panels, and we will
Longstanding Case May Be Finally Resolved Except for Appeal Costs for Two Parties. In our February 20, 2009 post, we looked at a complicated, multi-party construction dispute that produced some interesting fee rulings. That case was Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. Pacific Coast Roofing Corp. Because the 2009 appellate opinion remanded for reconsideration of certain
Excessiveness Challenge Rejected By Appellate Court. A party who was successfully dismissed as a proposed complainant in intervention, after two demurrers, was hit with a $204,637 fee award under Civil Code section 1717 based on a fees clause. The party was obviously upset, appealing the award as excessive. Not so, said the
60% Reduction by Trial Court Dispatched Inefficiency/Padding/Overcharge Challenges. In Fuentes v. Autozone, Inc., Case No. B224034 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Nov. 16, 2011) (certified for partial publication; fee discussion unpublished), plaintiff won a $160,000 FEHA damages award, with the lower court subsequently awarding attorney’s fees of $677,025 under the fee-shifting statute. In doing
Appeal Labeled “Insulting” by Appellate Court. In Kempton v. Prudential California Realty, Case No. B2311633 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Nov. 16, 2011) (unpublished), appellant appealed a costs award but made a blatantly false argument to the court, namely, that the trial court did not have a costs memorandum before it in ruling on
Crucial Inquiry Is Whether Temporary Conserator Acted In Good Faith and in Best Interest of Conservatee. Strange procedural cases actually produce new law, which is what happened in Conservatorship of Cornelius, Case No. A131495 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Nov. 15, 2011) (certified for publication). In this one, a 73-year old widower, who
$4,905.40 Fee Award Goes POOF!, However District Is Free to Try Again. School district won a demurrer against an employee applicant suing for gender discrimination. It then was awarded fees of $4,905.40 under Code of Civil Procedure section section 1038. The fee award got reversed in McCallum v. Escondido Union High School
$10,000 Fee Award to Wife Reversed by Fifth District. This next case demonstrates that unsworn statements about the nature of fee work will not support a fee award in the family law arena, much less other arenas. The Fifth District, in Marriage of Monroe, Case No. F061014 (5th Dist. Nov. 14, 2011)
HOA, on Remand, Will Get to Renew Request for $252,767 in Defense Fees. Here is an interesting one where an appellate court reversed the denial of a fee award as an abuse of discretion. The reason: HOA clearly prevailed when plaintiff dismissed 8 of 10 claims (some of them based on a fee-shifting
