Author name: Marc Alexander

Section 1717 And Integrated Contracts: Separate Operative Contract With No Fees Clause Justified Denial Of Fee To Prevailing Parties In Contract Suit Involving Numerous Agreements

Cases: Section 1717

  Integration Finding is Factual, With the Trial Court’s Determination Being Binding on Appeal.      Whether several contracts relating to the same matters and between the same parties are integrated is a factual question. As the next decision we look at demonstrates, the resolution of this initial question may also dispose of a decision on

Fee Substantiation: $199,607 Fee Award Affirmed Based On Lack Of Specificity In Framing Unreasonableness Challenge

Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Attorney Declaration as to Hourly Rates and Description of Work Adequately Substantiated Fee Petition Claims.      Defendant contractor and its president, sole shareholder, sole director, and sole employee (found to be the alter ego of the contractor) were found liable for $670,923 in damages in a construction defect lawsuit to purchasers of the Livermore

Homeowners Association Awards: Homeowner’s Success In Obtaining Permanent Injunction And Limited Restitution Entitled Him To Routine Costs Award Against HOA

Cases: Homeowner Associations

  Trial Court Properly Denied Fee to Either Side, Says Court of Appeal.      Don’t assume that the prevailing party determination for an award of routine costs and attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717/fee-shifting statutes is the same. They do differ, as the next case demonstrates.      In Duclos v. Marina Pacifica Homeowners Assn.,

Probate: Fee Award Against Beneficiary Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Probate

  Trustee Awarded Fee and Costs Based on Trial Court’s Determination that Beneficiary Presented Petition for Breach of Trust and Removal in Bad Faith.      “No good deed goes unpunished.” Although this saying frequently captures the moment, the next case actually demonstrates the opposite—a trustee’s kindness to his sister in a probate estate situation was

Insurance: Insurer Not Entitled To Cumis Arbitration Against Insurer Where NO Duty To Defend Determination Has Been Made

Cases: Insurance

  Fourth District, Division 1 So Holds in Recent Published Decision.      Certain Cumis (162 Cal.App.3d 358) fee disputes are subject to arbitration under Civil Code section 2860(c). However, the Fourth District, Division 1, in Intergulf Development v. Superior Court (Interstate Fire & Cas. Co.), Case No. D055459 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 24, 2010)

Scroll to Top