This Allows Offsetting for Client’s Debts to Government. In our past posts of October 1, 2009 and February 25, 2010, we explored the United States Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in and oral argument with respect to Astrue v. Ratliff, Case No. 08-1322 (U.S. June 14, 2010), which concerned who owned payments in […]
Theme: “It Pays to Be Reasonable” The L.A. Attorney Fee Conference is scheduled this year at Southwestern Law School, Los Angeles, California, June 24, 2010. The lunch buffet is scheduled noon to 1 p.m., and the CLE program is scheduled 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Mike and Marc have attended the program in
Fourth District, Division 3 Finds Grandchildren’s Action Did Not Contest a Trustee’s Account, So That There Was No Fee Entitlement under Section 17211(b) –Soria Tale. An award of attorney’s fees under California law always depends on answering a crucial preliminary question—is there a fee entitlement basis based on contract or statute. The answer
Quote Comes from 2002 Unpublished Opinion. We would like to thank Justice Richard Fybel of the Fourth District, Division 3 for a great quote from a prior unpublished opinion involving a homeowner association-property owner dispute. In Niguel Shores Community Association v. Buehler, 2002 WL 31121089 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 25, 2002), both
However, He Still Owes Ex-Wife Attorney’s Fees To Level The Playing Field. Harrison v. Harrison, Case No. B211921 (2d Dist., Div. 8 June 11, 2010) (unpublished) involved a fiery dissolution proceeding between ex-husband (a former pyrotechnician who started up his own business) and ex-wife (a mother of a small son who was a stay-at-home
Fourth District, Division 1 Reverses Arbitration Fee Award on Public Policy Grounds on Appeal. Code of Civil Procedure section 1284.3(a) is a pro-consumer arbitration provision that states an arbitrator/neutral cannot administer an arbitration for a consumer in a way that makes the consumer responsible to pay attorney’s fees or costs if he/she is
Fourth District, Division 3 Does Find That Fee “Estimates” For Future Work On Reply Papers/Appearance Adequately Underpins Ultimate Award. Although it has a great discussion of the Flatley exception and the circumstances where the litigation privilege is trumped by more specific statutes, our local Fourth District, Division 3 does have a nice discussion
O’Melveny and Western Center on Law & Poverty Reap Award, With O’Melveny Donating a Portion to Non-Profit Causes. O’Melveny & Myers LLP and the Western Center on Law & Poverty teamed up to prosecute a class action against Orange County’s Social Services Agency with respect to more expeditious processing and approval of food stamp
Ninth Circuit Disagrees with Seventh Circuit Over Fee Recovery for Compliance Activities and Also Reject That Laffey Matrix Had to Be Used in Determining Reasonable Hourly Rates. Prison Legal News v. Schwarzenegger, Case No. 09-15006 (9th Cir. June 9, 2010) (for publication) is an interesting Ninth Circuit decision regarding what fees are awardable under
Ninth Circuit Does Determine That “Fees on Fees” Are Not Recoverable In Sanctions Proceeding By Which Creditors’ Controlling Persons Held Jointly and Severally Liable For Involuntary Petition Dismissal Expenses. Here is an interesting one for you bankruptcy practitioners, with co-contributors Marc and Mike knowing several of the bankruptcy attorneys involved in the appeal.
