$38,000 Fee Award Out of Requested $88,795 Amount Affirmed on Appeal. Civil Code section 1717 does not always govern the award of contractual attorney’s fees. Code of Civil Procedure section 1021 allows the parties to make attorney’s fees agreements, by contract, that go beyond section 1717 dictates, allowing recovery for tort or even other […]
On January 5, 2010, the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office collected $4.8 million for the sale of a 3-acre lot south of downtown that was never developed by Concerned Citizens of South Central Los Angeles (a nonprofit organization), with the lot never materializing into a soccer field/youth center for low-income families despite the
Feess on Fees: Award Equals $779,100.34 in Fees, $11,769.20 in Expenses, and $28,776.49 in Other Costs. We learned from an unpublished order in the next case that according to a recent American Intellectual Property Lawyers Association survey, “the average patent infringement suit with between $1 million and $25 million at stake costs $1.794
Trope Prohibition Did Not Apply. Trope v. Katz, 11 Cal.4th 274, 292 (1995) can strike fears into the heart of litigators winning hard fought battles for their own interests—it held that a law firm that is represented in litigation by its member attorneys cannot recover attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717. Trope has
First District, Division 5 Faces First Impression Issue in Reviewing Trial Court’s Refusal to Enforce Arbitration Provision In Class Action Fee Resolution Arena. Well, we kick off our 2010 review of jurisprudence with an interesting decision from the First District, Division 5 in the class action area. In Cellphone Termination Fee Cases, Case
Sample Retainer Arbitration Clause Is Also Included. In our 2009 year end summary (Part 2 of 2), we examined the California Supreme Court’s decision in Schatz v. Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP, 45 Cal.4th 557 (2009), which examined the interplay between the California Arbitration Act and the Mandatory Fee Arbitration Act. It
Delaware Decision Shows How Substantial E-Discovery Monetary Sanctions Can Be Imposed In Failure to Preserve Evidence Case. Because California just recently passed e-discovery statutes, we continue to monitor cases of interest in fee and expense awards in computer spoliation cases. Here is one out of Delaware. In Beard Research, Inc. v. Kates (Kates
1st District, Division 4 Sustains Award in Entirety. Under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b), a trial court can award reasonable attorney’s fees to a prevailing defendant if the court finds the plaintiff’s action was frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation, even though not brought in bad faith. (County of Butte v. Bach, 172 Cal.App.3d 848, 869
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous New Year to All Our Readers . . .
Pre-Offer Costs Showed Plaintiffs Did Beat the 998 Offer. In the next case, defendants/respondents received a “misfortune cookie.” Shaffer v. Sassoon, Case No. B207219 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 30, 2009) (unpublished) is a case showing how Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offers operate in determining the prevailing party, cementing that pre-offer
