Parties Reached A Broad Stipulation To Allow Fee Motions To Be Resolved By The Arbitrator, With Only Unreviewable Legal Error Being Unchallenged. This next case may be a good reminder to make sure that arbitration stipulations are narrowly worded and possibly provide for more scrutinized review; if not, the broad stipulations will be enforced as
Lessons From These Decisions—Substantiate Fees In Detailed Fashion In California Federal Cases And Do Not Request Excessive Hourly Rates. Two Google cases in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, offer some guidance for class action/common fund practitioners on what to do and not do when requesting a substantial fee recovery in either a
Factual Issues Were At Issue, With The Lodestar Methodology Being Appropriate To Use As Well As New York Outside Counsel’s Rates With Respect To Gauging Reasonableness Of In-House Counsel Plaintiff’s Efforts In New York Litigation. Missakian v. Amusement Industry, Inc., Case No. B348390 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Oct. 19, 2026) (unpublished) is a case where
The Reason Was That The Sanctions Order Was Made Payable To Defendants, Rather Than Properly To The Court. Code of Civil Procedure section 177.5 does allow a court to sanction no more than $1,500 for a knowing violation of a court order, with the sanctions payable to the court. Cammas v. YMCA of the East
That Was The Case Because Plaintiff And Defendants Were Still In Arbitration. This next case had a little bit of everything: appealability, prevailing party, Civil Code section 1717, and prematurity issues. In BRHE Group v. Bates, Case No. G065703 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 15, 2026) (unpublished), plaintiff sued defendants under a business purchase contract
Generally, Fee Award Does Not Stand If A Serious Merits Judgment Reversal Occurs. In Palamino v. Northrup Gruman System Corp., Case Nos. H051676 et al. (6th Dist. Oct. 14, 2026) (unpublished), the appellate court was reviewing a wage hour statement sizable award to plaintiff of about $2 million for class damages, $3.16 million for PAGA
Lack Of Statutory Authorization Was Dispositive Based On The Individual Stake For Fee Recovery—Equitable Powers Extended To Protect Trust Interests. McKinley v. Harris, Case No. G066032 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 13, 2026) (published) is of interest to probate practitioners. The basic holding is that general “probate equitable principles” do not allow a trustee to
Judge Hesseltine Issued October 1, 2026 Tentative Rulings On Fee Applications. Although we usually post on California appellate opinions, we found that Orange County Superior Court Judge David J. Hesseltine issued some instructive tentative rulings on Song-Beverly Act fee applications which may be of interest (although we have not confirmed if the tentative rulings became
Prevailing Plaintiff Did Not Bring An Action Or Proceeding Under Sections 1600 Or 1601 Such That Section 1604’s Permissive Fee Statute Did Not Apply. The next case we post on counsels that if you are seeking attorney’s fees under a statute, you must often bring an action or a proceeding under that specific statute under
However, Portion Of Fee Award Awarded Against Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association Was Reversed On Appeal Because It Was Not An “Opposing Party” Under CCP § 1021.5, Meaning City Bore All Of The Fee Exposure. In Fresno Building Healthy Communities v. City of Fresno, Case Nos. F090084 et al. (5th Dist. Oct. 8, 2026) (unpublished), a
