First District, Division 2 So Holds in Lengthy Unpublished Opinion. In our category “Costs,” we have explored Code of Civil Procedure section 1032’s definition of prevailing party for purposes of a costs award. Although there are mandatory triggers requiring an award of costs to defined prevailing parties, the trial court has discretion to award […]
Fourth District, Division 1 Rejects “You Won One, I Won One” Scoreboard Approach to Section 1717. This next case shows that appellate courts do indeed apply a pragmatic test when deciding whether a “prevailing party” determination rightfully gauged who obtained greater relief for purposes of awarding attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717. (For
Orange County Superior Court Judge Colaw So Rules. In our May 4, 2009 post, we discussed a fee battle brewing in Orange County Superior Court after St. James Church’s SLAPP motion eventually lost in a case against the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles. That battle has now taken place so that we can
Magistrate Also Rules that Post-Trial Expert Fee Declarations Are Not Subject to Pre-Trial Expert Report Disclosure Requirements. This next post discusses a topic that we have seen very few decisions on: the scope of federal discovery in post-trial fee proceedings, which are usually based on affidavits or declarations submitted by the attorneys requesting fees
$9,387.50 Appellate Fees Awardable After Appeal Court Dismisses Appeal Without Written Decision. Stevens v. Paul, Case No. A122993 (1st Dist., Div. 2 May 18, 2009) (unpublished) confronted an unusual procedural situation: plaintiff lost a SLAPP motion (hit with $5,155 in fees); appealed and lost in a summary non-written dismissal order; plaintiff was assessed further
His Attorneys Are Seeking a $1 Million Lodestar Plus a Multiplier. According to a May 14, 2009 article by Joseph Serna in the Daily Pilot, civil attorneys representing Newport Beach police Sgt. Neil Harvey, who obtained a favorable civil rights award of $1.2 million from a jury earlier this year, will be moving for
Rules of the Road For Creating Alternative Fee Arrangements Versus Pure Hourly Rates. Peter D. Zeughauser (formerly with The Irvine Company) is now a consultant who frequently writes about client-attorney fee arrangements. In his article “Alternative Reality” (pp. 75-76), he offers these “rules of the road” for creating an intelligent alternative fee structure: Understand
Fourth District, Division 3 Reverses Denial of Wife’s Request for Family Code section 271 Sanctions. The next case showcases a 30-year divorce saga between Jose and Janna Feliciano, who co-wrote and produced many popular songs, with one of the most famous being Feliz Navidad. A family law judge determined that Janna would not share
Second District, Division 5 Confirms That Surety Is Usually Liable For Fees If Obligor-Obligee Contracts Calls For Fees. This next case should be of interest for you practitioners who practice construction law involving payment/performance bonds issued by a surety. Usually, the bonds confirm a tripartite arrangement between the obligor (in the next case, the
Fourth District, Division 2 Remands For Proper Determination, Using Applicable Legal Principles. In our category “Family Law Awards,” we frequently have surveyed decisions in which attorney’s fees were awarded to one side in a family law dispute based on “need” (Family Code sections 2030 and 2032) or as a “sanctions” because of litigious conduct
