Although Remanded, Facts Suggested A Possible Delay Because Of A Calamity Evacuation By Defense Counsel. As we have said before, the CCP § 1281.98 defense missed payment deadline for employer/employee cases have resulted in many reversals and remands. That also occurred in Colon-Perez v. Security Industry Specialists, Case No. A168297 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Feb. […]
Procedural And Excessiveness Challenges Not Successful On Appeal. Litigants and practitioners are reminded that mandatory SLAPP fees, if granted to a true prevailing defendant, are hard to overturn as to amount where the record is clear that the defendants were true prevailing parties in entirety. That was the case in Homeport Insurance v. Weltin, et
Substantial Evidence Supported The Result, Not To Mention A $35,000 Reduction In Requested Fees Showed No Arbitrary Result. Discovery disputes are contentious, and lower courts have a hard time on them based on the numerous issues that may be involved. However, they have no problems sanctioning for a failure to meet and confer. And that
Lower Court Implicitly Extended The Deadline When Plaintiff’s Attorney Indicated Not Receiving The Trial Cost Memorandum (Which Was Cured), With Plaintiff Also Not Showing The Allowed Costs Were Improper—No Reversible Error. In Kirk v. Quirino, Case No. B340782 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Feb. 11, 2026) (unpublished), plaintiff lost a car accident case, with the lower
The Dismissed Claims Were “On The Contract” Under Civil Code Section 1717. We think that sometimes litigants and practitioners do not appreciate that Civil Code section 1717’s definition of “on the contract” is liberally construed, meaning that even tort claims based on contractual documents frequently will give rise to fee exposure. JAJ3, LLC v. Bren,
Unsuccessful Claim Work, Impact On Future Litigation, Issues Remaining To Be Litigated, And Whether Defendants Remain The Prevailing Parties Based On SLAPP Denial As To Two Alleged Defamatory Communications Remaining. In White v. Gabriel, Case No. H052203 (6th Dist. Feb. 6, 2026) (unpublished) (White II), plaintiff sued several defendants for defamation, with two defendants entirely
CC&R And Nuisance Claims Were Intertwined, So No Apportionment Required, And Fee Excessive Claims Were Not Supported By Record Citations. Finley v. Gantz, Case No. D084145 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 6, 2026) (unpublished) reinforces a message we have refrained in the past: homeowner disputes can be expensive for the losing side, which will allow
Section 1717 Did Not Give Rise To Fees Based Upon DisputeSuite Opinion. This opinion highlights the importance of wording in a fees clause. Broader language, such as “the prevailing party in any dispute or proceeding arising hereunder shall be entitled to recovery its costs and expenses incurred therein (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses),” can
There Are Some Specified Exclusions. Assembly Bill No. 692, adding Business and Professions Code section 16608 and Labor Code section 926 to the statutory law effective January 1, 2026, prohibits employers from entering into employment contract containing terms that require repayment, collection, or penalties triggered by termination of employment. Employees have the right to bring
Denial Of Fees Was Improper, Because Tenants Showed The Written Lease With A Fees Clause Was Inapplicable. In Hernandez v. Kocsis, Case No. G064238 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 4, 2026) (unpublished), authored by Justice Sanchez, the 4/3 DCA reversed a denial of attorney’s fees requested by plaintiffs/tenants. The case involved a negligence/premises liability case
