Lower Court Erred In Awarding $5,218.60 in Filing Fees, Motion Fees, and Registered Process Server Charges. In Meyers v. Fitzgerald, Case No. H032605 (6th Dist. Nov. 19, 2009) (unpublished), plaintiffs filed a complaint that was ordered to arbitration. The complaint was later dismissed without prejudice based on certain voluntarily actions taken by defendants. However, […]
Negligently Causing Brush Fire to Ranch Previously Used to Raise Livestock Gave Rise to Fee Recovery. Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.9 mandates an award of reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing plaintiff “in any action to recover damages to personal or real property resulting from trespassing on lands either under cultivation or intended
“Borrowing” Statute’s Fee Provision Does Not Translate to Fee Exposure Under UCL. In a case of first impression, the Second District, Division Three reconciled two conflicting statutory schemes, deciding that a prevailing defendant was not entitled to a fee recovery under a fee-shifting statute used only as a “borrowing” statute predicate under California’s Unfair
Class Counsel’s Obligations Do Not End With Entry of Judgment. Class actions have heightened obligations for class counsel, with fiduciary obligations that transcend those owed to non-class clients. The next case shows that the obligations extend beyond mere entry of judgment. Barboza v. West Coast Digital GSM, Inc., Case No. B215454 (2d Dist.,
Second District, Division 4 Reverses Sanctions Award For Failure to Meet Technical Requirements. Here is one for all of you practitioners desiring to set up a CCP section 128.7 sanctions motion, correctly we might add. Defendant served plaintiff with a notice of motion for sanctions in the amount of $7,022.50 under CCP section
L.A. Counsel Rates Found Reasonable in Complex Imperial County Lawsuit. One should keep in mind that, as an out-of-county attorney litigating in other venues, you should not assume your “native” hourly rates will not be honored in a subsequent fee motion after you have won. The next case solidifies that this may well
Fourth District, Division 1 Reminds Us All of An Important Lesson in the Appellate Arena. The Fourth District, Division 1, provided us all with an important reminder of timely appealing judgments in order to preserve appellate jurisdiction. In Gravelle v. Aquadek, Case No. D054215 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 17, 2009) (unpublished), defendant
Court of Appeal Finds Fee Clause is Broad Enough to Encompass All Three Actions. Under Civil Code section 1717, the key to recovering fees in disputes involving contract and tort claims often devolves to a determination of whether the fee clause is sufficiently broad to encompass matters “arising out of” or “concerning” the
Appellate Panel Does Not Condone Sanctioned Conduct, But Found No Discovery Law Basis To Sustain the Award. As we have indicated before, attorney’s fees awards—whether mundane or imposed as a sanctions—must either have a contractual or statutory basis, depending on the type of award. The next case illustrates, even though the discovery conduct
Second District, Division 7 Agrees with Sister Court that Costs Are Awardable if Reasonably Necessary to the Conduct of the Litigation Based on Analogous Out-of-County Counsel Cases. In Jessen v. Mentor Corp., Case No. B210059 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Nov. 17, 2009) (unpublished), the Second District, Division 7 agreed with the Fourth District,
