Former Assistant Says She Cannot Pay, in Pending L.A. Superior Court Proceedings. As reported in a November 29, 2010 post on the on-line version of the Beverly Hills Courier, Heather Devlin, former assistant of Hollywood agent Todd Shemarya, lost a gender discrimination claim after a jury trial. Agent’s attorneys, claiming the suit was […]
Fourth District, Division 2 Finds No “Prevailing Party” Standard Applies in Post-Judgment Collection Efforts With Respect to Fee Recovery. In this category, we have examined several decisions dealing with statutes that allow for fee recovery, if certain conditions are met (with a judgment having to provide for fee recovery), under Code of Civil Procedure
Second District, Division 5 Rules on Applicability of Grant v. List & Lathrop. In Silver v. Pacific American Fish Co., Inc., Case No. B214450 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Nov. 30, 2010) (certified for partial publication, on the fee issue), the appellate court confronted whether a cross-complainant correctly appealed a postjudgment order awarding fees to
Arbitration Panel Awards Fee to Defense, With Motion to Vacate Award Being Denied. In Holland v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, 2009 WL 7035871 (S.D. Cal. Award May 18, 2009), plaintiffs sued Wachovia Securities, LLC and its manager for wrongful termination based mainly on age discrimination. Wachovia counterclaimed that plaintiffs violated the Computer Fraud and
$50,000 Of Requested Fees/Costs Not Awarded. Recently, Los Angeles County Superior Court Ralph Dau granted some Swedish filmmaker’s anti-SLAPP motion against Dole arising from Dole’s dismissal of a defamation counterclaim relating to the filmmaker’s documentary “Bananas!” Then, the Swedish filmmakers requested fees/costs of about $250,000 under the mandatory anti-SLAPP fee shifting statute that
Fourth District, Division 3 Affirmance Based on Lack of Record on Challenges. Justice Ikola, in a 3-0 panel decision in Aziz v. Mason-Arnold, Case No. G042470 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 29, 2010) (unpublished), affirmed a $2,600 attorney’s fees award and costs to defendant in a post-judgment harassment TRO dispute. Plaintiff challenged the post-judgment
Challenging Plaintiff Did Not Show Specificity in Padding, Duplication, or Unrelatedness Arguments To Support Fee Reduction. To our dear readers after Thanksgiving, here is a case with excellent reminders about steps you should take when challenging lower court fee awards. Make sure that you make specific challenges, not just arguments, supported with declarations from
Efficiency and Alternative Arrangements Are Gaining in Favor. In the October 2010 edition of U.S. News & World Report, the magazine ranks the “best” U.S. law firms (whether big or small), based on certain categories of specializations. That alone is interesting reading. However, the article also has some interesting observations on the trends, short-term
Bris Attendance Is Basis For Continuance, But Ruling Goes Further. Let us wish all of our readers a happy and joyous Thanksgiving as well as blessings on our men and women in the service (both in the U.S. and overseas). Now, for an interesting request made to and subsequent order from U.S. District
Circuit Judge Posner Tackles the Jumble of Standards Utilized by Federal Circuit Courts. For those readers who practice intellectual property law (especially under the Lanham Act), we commend for reading Circuit Judge Posner’s recent decision in Nightingale Home Healthcare, Inc. v. Anodyne Therapy, __ F.3d __, 2010 WL 4721581 (7th Cir. Nov. 23, 2010).
