Author name: Marc Alexander

Special Fee Shifting Statutes–Environmental: District Court Erred By Not Awarding At Least Some Attorney’s Fees To Prevailing Plaintiff Under Clean Water Act Section 505(d)

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Need for Permit and Small Civil Penalty Did Trigger Fee Recovery.      Clean Water Act (CWA) section 505(d), 33 U.S.C. § 1365(d), allows a district court discretion to award attorney’s fees if two findings are made: (1) the free applicant was a prevailing or substantially prevailing party; and (2) a fee award is “appropriate.” […]

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Plaintiff Obtaining Document Compliance Under California Public Record Act Denied Fee Request Of Over $117,000

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Document Disclosure Was Not Motivated By Records Request, Rules Fourth District, Division 3      The California Public Records Act (PRA), Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq., has a mandatory fee shifting provision when a plaintiff prevails and compels disclosures of public records after initiating civil proceedings for injunctive or declaratory relief or mandate in

Civil Rights: Nonprevailing Plaintiff in Unruh Act, DPA, And ADA Lawsuit Was Properly Not Hit With Adverse Fee Award

Cases: Civil Rights

  ADA Frivolousness Was Only Fee Basis, Which Was Not Established.      Handicapped plaintiff in Pike v. Fillmore & Western Railway, Inc., Case No. B225578 (2d Dist., Div. 6 May 17, 2011) (unpublished) dodged a fee exposure bullet after not prevailing in a lawsuit brought under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, the California Disabled Persons

Class Actions: Class Member Not Arguing Constructive Common Fund Has No Standing To Challenge Fee Recovery Paid By Settling Defendant

Cases: Class Actions

  Ninth Circuit So Rules In Recent Decision.      In Glasser v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., Case No. 09-56618 (9th Cir. May 17, 2011) (for publication), VW settled with plaintiff in a class action after it consented to new disclosures relating to its smart-key replacement technology (but paid no money to the class), agreeing nevertheless

Judgment Enforcement: Attorney’s Fees Not Authorized For Prevailing In Independent Creditor’s Suit

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Reversal of Fortune, With Appellate Court Reversing $1,492,643.71 Fees Award.      In an interesting dispute over moneys contractually owed for home video distribution of the Steven Seagal movie “The Patriot,” a judgment creditor won an independent creditor’s suit under Code of Civil Procedure section 708.210 et seq., with the lower court also awarding $1,492,643.71 in

In The News . . . . District Court Gives Preliminary Approval To Black Farmers’ Class Action Discrimination Settlement

In The News

  September 1 Hearing Will Consider Fairness of Settlement and Fee Requests.      In a February 24, 2010 “In the News” post, we reported on a pending $1.25 billion settlement involving allegations of discrimination against black farmers by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.      We can now report that U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman (of

Common Fund/Multipliers: Recent Vioxx Products Liability Decision Has “Must Reading” Discussion of Common Fund Theory

Cases: Common Fund, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers

  Case Discusses It in Class Action and MDL Complex Litigation Contexts, Also Indicating Perdue Decision Did Not Apply to Using Lodestar as Check on Percentage of Recovery Fee Award.      For those practitioners dealing with cases where a common fund is created (from which fee awards are frequently sought), we came across a case

Civil Rights/Retainer Agreements: Section 1988 Fee Recovery Right Cannot Be Assigned By Litigant/Client To Attorney

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  Ninth Circuit So Held in Pony.      A recent memorandum decision in a Ninth Circuit case reminds all of you civil rights practitioner of an important caveat: clients own the rights to fees under federal civil rights cases such that they cannot be assigned to their attorneys. However, attorney’s lien rights might lead to

Scroll to Top