Author name: Marc Alexander

FEHA Prevailing Defendant Does Not Garner Attorney’s Fees Award Unless Plaintiff Action Found To Be Frivolous In Nature

Cases: Civil Rights

Second District Affirms Principle in Recent Unpublished Decision.             FEHA, Government Code sec. 12900 et seq., is the California Fair Employment and Housing Act that prohibits racial discrimination and retaliation.  Government Code section 12965(b) provides that the court, in its discretion, may award to the prevailing party reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, […]

Attorney’s Fees Awarded As Sanctions For Losing Disqualification Motion Were Unsupportable

Cases: Sanctions

Fourth District, Division Two Reverses Fee Awards Against Defendants and Their Counsel.              Defendants and their counsel lost a motion to disqualify plaintiffs’ counsel in an unlawful detainer trial.  The trial court ordered that losing defendants and their counsel, jointly and severally, pay plaintiffs’ attorney’s fees of $8,776.25, as sanctions, under Code

Sleepless In Northern California Might Reap You Anti-SLAPP Motion Attorney’s Fees As The Prevailing Defendants

Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Standard of Review

First District Affirms Fee Award to Homeowners’ Association, Association President, and Sleepless Resident Prevailing on an anti-SLAPP Motion.             Unless you are an Iron Man or a fortunate individual with a high metabolism, sleep is a precious commodity.  Loss of sleep can definitely impede quality of life for many people.  Sometimes, as

Winning Joint Venture Litigant Denied Attorney’s Fees Because The Operative Memorandum Of Understanding Had No Fees Clauses And Other Peripheral Contracts With Fees Clauses Were Not Part of An Integrated Transaction

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Standard of Review

Sixth District Finds That Stock Option and Voting Trust Agreements Were Not Interrelated and Never Sued Upon In Winning Litigant’s Complaint.             Under Civil Code section 1717, one needs a written agreement with a fee clause for potential attorney’s fees recovery.  Many times, there are several agreements involved in an overall transaction,

E-Discovery: California State And Federal Courts Will Award Attorney’s Fees As Sanctions For Hiding or Obstructing Electronic Document Discovery

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Lombardo and Qualcomm Typlify Cases Sustaining Substantial Fee Awards in E-Discovery Disputes.             About a year ago, LiveOffice, an on-demand messaging security provider, released these fascinating findings based on a nationwide survey: ·         53% of 400 IT managers and consumers admitted that they were not in position to meet federal

Pretrial Attachment Remedies Allow For Provisional Award of Costs and Allowable Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Code of Civil Procedure section 482.110 Authorizes Adding Costs and Attorney’s Fees to the Attachable Principal Amount.             For practitioners who have prosecuted or defended collection/contract actions, you have most certainly run into the California pretrial writ of attachment remedy.  The pretrial attachment statutory scheme is a potent remedy to allow a

Suing Real Estate Buyers, Who Were Defensed At Judgment On The Pleadings Stage, Were Not Stung With Real Estate Purchase Contractual Fees By Victorious Brokers, But Did Suffer Fee Exposure From Lis Pendens Expungement Proceeding

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Lis Pendens, Cases: Section 1717

Third District Affirms Award of Lis Pendens Expungement Fees to Brokers and Sustains Denial of Attorney’s Fees to Brokers Under Real Estate Purchase Agreement Fee Clause.             This next case deals with contractual fee awards under Civil Code section 1717 and fees assessed against a party that lost a lis pendens expungement

CEQA Prevailing Parties: You Must Prove A Significant Public Benefit In Order To Obtain An Attorney’s Fees Award Under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Standard of Review

Second District Eliminates a $254,087.77 Fee/Costs Award to Prevailing CEQA Plaintiff Where Significant Public Benefit Element Not Demonstrated As a Matter of Law.             Under California’s private attorney fees statute, a trial court may award attorney’s fees to a successful party in any public interest action involving an important public right if

Violation of In Limine Rulings Does Not Give Rise To Attorney’s Fees Sanctions

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Section 998, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First District Reverses Fee Sanctions Award and Award to State Under Code of Civil Procedure section 1038, But Affirms 998 Award to State.             This next case establishes that fee sanctions must have a firm basis in legislatively-authorized statutes (or implementing rules) that have solid due process protections.  Relying only on inherent

Scroll to Top