Author name: Marc Alexander

Employment: $7,475 In Fees Awarded To Plaintiff Employee For Recovering $3,289.90 In Wage/Hour Dispute

Cases: Employment, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Plaintiff’s Request for Over $58,500 In Fees Is Firmly Rejected.      Labor Code section 218.5 holds that a prevailing party in an action for nonpayment of wages, fringe benefits, or health/welfare/pension fund contributions must be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees. It was that pesky word “reasonable” that resulted in a much diminished fee award than […]

Bankruptcy: Judgment For Attorney’s Fees Not Affected By Bankruptcy Discharge If Judgment Supports A Perfected Pre-Bankruptcy Lien

Cases: Bankruptcy Efforts

  Second District, Division 6 Applies This Principle to Resolve Appeal.      The Second District, Division 6, in the elegantly short opinion of Somogyi v. Adley, Case No. B217525 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Sept. 21, 2010) (unpublished), reminds us of an important principle that many might think would not apply to post-discharge, pre-petition perfected judgment

Requests For Admissions: Corporate General Counsel Defendant and Corporate Defendant Hammered With $123,455 In RFA “Costs Of Proof” Sanctions In Personal Injury Case

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: Requests for Admission

Second District, Division 2 Affirms And Awards $5,000 For a Frivolous Appeal.      In our category “Requests for Admissions,” we have discussed numerous cases examining the “costs of proof” sanctions under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.420 for litigants that unreasonably deny RFAs for matters later proven true at trial. (The most potent sanction is

Sanctions: Second Circuit Holds That FRCP 11 “Safe Harbor” Filing Requirements Are Reset With Filing Of New Amended Complaint

Cases: Sanctions

$113,667 Rule 11 Sanctions Award Against Plaintiffs and His Attorneys Falls as a Result.      Although we do not venture out of California that often, here is an interesting recent decision about a vacated sanctions award under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11 that comes out of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Private Attorney General Statute: Fourth District, Division 1 Reverses Trial Judge’s Refusal To Allow Supplemental Trial Fees To Plaintiffs That Obtained Appellate Success For CEQA Claims

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Appellate Panel Also Has Good Things to Say for Appellate Attorneys—Their Work is Specialized and May Command Higher Fee Awards Despite Some Duplication With Trial Work.      Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino, Case No. D056972 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 17, 2010) (certified for publication) is an interesting case mainly for

In The News . . . . Nice Fee Recovery To Plaintiffs’ Attorneys In Avacor Hair Regrowth System Class Action And Cobles Ordered To Reimburse Caltrans Substantial Costs In Wrongful Death Lawsuit Loss

In The News

$9,963,000 Fee Award Approved in Recent Avacor Class Action Settlement.      As reported by plaintiffs’ lead trial counsel Scott A. Bursor, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Robert B. Freedman, on September 16, 2010, approved a $30 million class action settlement in a case involving false advertisement claims with respect to the Avacor hair regrowth system.

Section 998: 998 Offer Made To One Of Three Defendants Was Not In Bad Faith Or Unreasonable, Even Though Expert Fees And Costs Were Given To Winning Plaintiff After Successful Jury Verdict

Cases: Section 998

First District, Division 1 Faces Some Interesting Section 998 Wrinkles in a Joint and Several Defense Context. Wrinkles.  Shar Pei.  Wikipedia.        Hats off to the First District, Division 1 for a very scholarly opinion centering on Code of Civil Procedure section 998 pretrial offers in a multiple defendant situation, even though the winning

Scroll to Top