Author name: Marc Alexander

Arbitration: Trial Court Erroneously Vacating Entire Arbitration Award, Rather Than Just Part Of Award Against Nonsignatories, Must Reconsider Propriety of Arbitrator’s Fee Award On Remand

Cases: Arbitration

Second District, Division 3 Remands for Reconsideration of Fee Issues.      Tenzera, Inc. v. Osterman, Case No. B211656 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 21, 2010) (unpublished) involved a hefty arbitration award of $426,047.72 in favor of homeowners and against contractor (a corporate entity) and against contractor’s principals (father and son), as well as an $181,000 […]

Prevailing Party: Appeal Dismissed As Moot Where Final Resolution Has Not Yet Been Reached In Entire Dispute

Cases: Prevailing Party

Sixth District Finds Challenge to Superseded Ruling is Moot.      The next case is an illustration of the principle that prevailing party status usually cannot be determined “until the dust has finally settled.”      In Campagna v. Gatley Properties, Case No. H034112 (6th Dist. Jan. 21, 2010) (unpublished), after two prior appeals, the appellate court

Reasonableness Of Fees: Winning HOA Unit Owners Obtain $238,426 In Attorney’s Fees, But Fail At Obtaining $62,056 More

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Court of Appeal Likes Reasoned Deductions Made by Trial Court.      This next case might be put in the category “quit while you are ahead” as far as challenging the reasonableness of an attorney’s fees award, especially when you are asking for an increase to an already substantial award.      Defendant unit owners in an

Rent Stabilization Ordinance: Winning Plaintiffs In Wrongful Eviction Action Awarded $306,321.50 In Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Lodestar Is the Standard, and Attorney Still Entitled to Lodestar Fees Even Where Client Agreement Was Below Market or Discounted in Nature. The lodestar method is the one used most often by trial courts in awarding both attorney’s fees under contractual provisions and fee-shifting statutes. What about county ordinances containing fee-shifting sections? Answer: lodestar also.

In the News . . . . Circuit Judge Posner Criticizes Lawyers Representing Suing Class Action Attorney For “Failing to Rein Him In” During Fee Fight With His Former Firm

In The News

     As reported by Debra Cassens Weiss in a January 14, 2010 post on the American Bar Association’s website, Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner recently chided lawyers for Rex Carr, a class action attorney who has sued his former firm for over $20 million in compensatory damages in connection with fee disputes, for “neglecting their

Civil Rights: CCP § 1038 Does Not Apply To Unsuccessful 1983 Civil Rights Claims

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First District, Division 4 So Decides, Also Denying Fees on a Different Theory Raised After Losing the § 1038 Request—Counseling to Seek Fees on Multiple Grounds the First Time Around.      State entities eventually defended against a civil rights claim brought by a peace officer organization under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. State entities then moved

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Failure To File Certificate Of Merit Did Not Give Rise To Fee Recovery Where Indemnity Cross-Complainant Had Obtained Expert Opinion Before Filing Cross-Complaint

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

“No Harm, No Foul” Means No Real Reason to Award Fees Under a Discretionary Statute.      For those of you who litigate construction actions, you likely are familiar with the requirement that indemnity cross-complainants must file a certificate of merit—after obtaining a favorable expert opinion—in cross-claims filed against professional engineers, architects, or surveyors. (Code Civ.

Scroll to Top