Author name: Marc Alexander

PREVAILING BORROWERS IN A JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE CASE ARE AWARDED ATTORNEY’S FEES WITHOUT ANY OFFSET IN FAVOR OF LOSING LENDER

Cases: War Stories

Trial Judge Held That Lender Lost Any Right to Deficiency So That There Was No Obligation In Existence for Offsetting Purposes.             For several years culminating in a trial in late 2002, Mike Hensley represented borrowers in a judicial foreclosure action brought by an out-of-state lender seeking to obtain the collateral real

NALFA HAS JUNE 19, 2008 PROGRAM ON ATTORNEY’S FEES IN LOS ANGELES

Uncategorized

“Attorney Fee Litigation: It Pays To Be Reasonable” at Southwestern Law School The National Association of Legal Fee Analysis (NALFA), a non-profit organization specializing in attorney fees and litigation costs, is sponsoring a program called “Attorney Fee Litigation: It Pays To Be Reasonable” on June 19, 2008, from noon to 5 p.m., at Southwestern Law

SECOND DISTRICT FINDS THAT REYNOLDS METALS JUSTIFIED FEE AWARD TO PARTIES DEFEATING ALTER EGO CLAIM IN BIFURCATED TRIAL

Cases: Prevailing Party

Liminal Determination of the Alter Ego Allegations, Before Any Liability Consideration, Deemed Inconsequential For Purposes of Applying Reynolds.             Reynolds Metals Co. v. Alperson, 25 Cal.3d 124 (1979), posted in our Leading Cases, is a venerable decision holding that defendants prevailing on alter ego allegations. in a full trial of all issues,

THE BUSSEY DEBATE IS NO LONGER DEBATABLE—EXPERT WITNESS FEES AND OVERHEAD COSTS CANNOT BE RECOVERED AS “ATTORNEY’S FEES”

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Bussey Court Abrogates Its Own Decision in Line With Criticisms Of Sister Appellate Courts             As alluded to in our June 4 post discussing the recent Richlin Security decision, there was a prior rift in opinion among the California appellate courts over whether expenses such as expert witness fees, investigator fees, long distance

SUBSTANTIAL ATTORNEY’S FEES AWARDED WHEN DEFAULT JUDGMENT VACATED IN PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Standard of Review

Second District Awards Fees and Costs of $37,146 Against Attorney Admitting Neglect in Responding to Complaint.             Can trial courts award substantial attorney’s fees against attorneys admitting neglect when they seek relief from default judgments on behalf of clients?  You bet, said the Second District in a recent unpublished decision.     

PARALEGALS UNITE!—UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT HOLDS PREVAILING PARTY MAY RECOVER ITS PARALEGAL FEES FROM THE GOVERNMENT AT PREVAILING MARKET RATES

Cases: Paralegal Time, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

High Court Construes EAJA To Allow Award of Paralegal Expenses as “Fees” at “Prevailing Market Rates.”             Petitioner Richlin prevailed against the Government on a claim before the Department of Transportation’s Board of Contract Appeals, and then filed an application for reimbursement, among other things, of paralegal fees pursuant to the Equal

ATTORNEY’S FEES AWARDS TO PREVAILING PLAINTIFFS UNDER THE CONSUMERS LEGAL REMEDIES ACT—CAN RECOVERY BE HAD FOR PREFILING SETTLEMENTS OR SETTLEMENTS AFTER LITIGATION HAS BEEN COMMENCED? We Provide Answers Below.

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Recent Article in California Lawyer Explores Potential Limitations on Fee Recovery for Suing Plaintiffs under CLRA.             Greg Nylen, an opponent in a class action that Mike Hensley is prosecuting, has written a nifty article in the June 2008 California Lawyer, entitled “Handling Claims under the CLRA” (found at pages 43-46 of

ELDER ABUSE CLAIM, BASED ON RECKLESSNESS, DOES NOT ALLOW FOR GRANT OF STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S FEES AWARD WHERE CAUSATION NOT PROVEN BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Standard of Review

Second District So Holds In Case of First Impression Statutory Interpretation of Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.             Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657 provides that a defendant proven liable for physical abuse or neglect under prior sections of the Elder Abuse Act, where the commission of the abuse was done

Scroll to Top