Author name: Marc Alexander

Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Second Circuit Court of Appeals Rules That Contemporaneous Time Records Need To Be Presented For Fee Recovery In All But Rarest Of Cases

Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees, Rates

Federal Decision Highlights Differences Between Federal Versus California State Approaches; Second Circuit Does Allow Attorney an Equitable “Fallback” Approach.      At the California state law level, although it is a good idea to keep them, contemporaneous time records are not required substantiation in fee proceedings. (Chavez v. Netflix, Inc., 162 Cal.App.4th 43, 64 (2008).) Beyond […]

Allocation: Trial Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion By Not Apportioning Out Work on Interrelated Claims When Fashioning Fee Award

Cases: Allocation

$239,649.87 Fee Award Sustained on Appeal in Civil Rights Case.      Defendants were found by jurors to have inflicted emotional distress on plaintiff, and one defendant was found to have violated the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976 (Civ. Code, § 51.7) by committing/threatening violence based on plaintiff’s gender. Because the Ralph Civil Rights Act

Appeal/Section 998: Prevailing Party Status From Rejected 998 Offer Examined In Fifth District Opinion

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Section 998

Primer on Allocation of Preoffer/Postoffer Costs in Instructive Decision.      Code of Civil Procedure section 998, as we should know by now, is a legislatively-mandated statute that modifies the general routine costs provision of CCP § 1032 by augmenting or withholding the costs normally allowable under section 1032. Put another way, section 998 establishes a

Discovery Sanctions: Blocking Deposition Questions On Prior Stress Events Justified Discovery Sanctions Against Plaintiff And His Attorney

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

  Vinson Allows Such Inquiries During Discovery.      Where a plaintiff in a wrongful termination suit puts his/her medical condition into controversy, Vinson v. Superior Court, 43 Cal.3d 833 (1987) held that an IME/psychological exam was fair game because this condition was at issue in the suit.      In like vein, Acting Justice Rylaarsdam on

Pleading: Complaint Does Not Have To Specify The Dollar Amount Of Attorney’s Fees To Justify Default Judgment Based On Future Terminating Sanction Conduct

Cases: Pleading

  Extensive Opinion Shows Why Due Process and Policy Reasons Justify End Result:  Lex non cogit ad impossibilia.      In an extensive opinion, the Second District, Division 1 has decided that unspecified attorney’s fees in a complaint can justify a later default judgment entered as a terminating sanction, without offending due process rules applicable to

Fee Clause Interpretation: Pursuing Reserved Appellate Rights Did Not Give Rise To Fee Recovery Under Settlement Agreement Fees Clause

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  $35,000 Fee Award Vacated By Second District, Division 5.      Where the contents of a contractual fees clause is clear in nature (with no factual disputes), this sets up an issue of law that an appellate court can review de novo. (Winet v. Price, 4 Cal.App.4th 1159, 1165-1166 (1992).) That is exactly what happened

Section 1717: Broadly Worded Fee Clause Meant Fees Had To Be Apportioned When Lease Only Signed By One Of The Defendants

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

  Wild Landlord-Tenant Dispute Gives Rise to Reversal of $212,685 Fee Award Against Both Signing and Nonsigning Defendants.      Robertson v. Sapir, Case No. B224458 (2d Dist., Div. 3 May 24, 2011) (unpublished) was a “wild” landlord-tenant dispute including reported accusations of landlord’s brother (a tenant in a boarding room type of arrangement) bothering a

Scroll to Top