Another Published Opinion In This Area—Be A Human, Read, Check, And Verify AI Research. In re the Domestic Partnership of Campos & Munoz, Case No. D085584 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 5, 2026) (published) is post-worthy because it builds on prior cases and imposed $5,000 in appeal sanctions, payable to the appellate clerk, for filing […]
Probate Code Section 859 Was The Penalty And Fees/Costs Entitlement Statute. In a very sad set of facts, but ones under which beneficiaries prevailed against a misappropriating trustee, the lower court in Moramarco v. Nowakoski, Case No. E084620 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 5, 2026) (unpublished), following a State Bar disbarment/restitution order because trustee was
However, Remand Was Ordered To See If Severance Could Allow Arbitration To Proceed. In Foster v. Liberty Military Housing Holdings, LLC, Case No. D085268 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 4, 2026; posted Mar. 5, 2026) (unpublished), an employment agreement had an arbitration clause with the following fees and costs provisions: “If required by law applicable
Case Found That Plaintiffs Could Not Meet The Successful Parties Element, Even Under A Catalyst Theory. In Physicians for Social Responsibility – L.A. v. Dept. of Toxic Substances Control, Case No. C100487 (3d Dist. Mar. 4, 2026) (published), the appellate court affirmed a denial of private attorney general fees, under a catalyst theory, where the
$800,000 Fee Request Denied, With The Appellate Court Observing That The Result Could Have Gone The Other Way—But Discretion Is Involved When One Side Does Not Knock It Completely Out Of The Park. Hakim-Baba v. Desai, Case No. H050787 (6th Dist. Mar. 4, 2026) (unpublished) was a messy case where plaintiff primarily sought to rescind
A Broad By-Law Fees/Cost Clause, The Davis-Stirling Act, And JAMS Cost Provision Amply Justified The Arbitration Award Which Was Confirmed As A Judgment. The next post illustrates a familiar ending story in many homeowner-HOA disputes, whether brough in court or in arbitration: a prevailing party will face the prospect of obtaining substantial recoupment of attorney’s
Appeal Involved Review Of A CCP § 128.7 Sanctions Order Below. In Dunn Investment Properties, Inc. v. Johnson, Case Nos. B339562 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 26, 2026) (unpublished), a lower court sanctioned a party’s law firm and one of its attorneys under CCP § 128.7 to the tune of $11,725 for bringing
Lower Court Did Not Evaluate Under Inherent Authority Of The Court Standards, So A Revisit Was In Order. In Chen v. Asian Square, Inc., Case No. H052309 (6th Dist. Feb. 25, 2026) (unpublished), within hours of defendant accepting plaintiffs’ CCP § 998 offers, plaintiffs’ counsel notified defendant that plaintiffs had not provided informed consent for
Trial Judge Needed To Assess Culpability And Whether Missed Payment Was Excusable. In Aqua Blue Constr., Inc. v. Goshorn, Case No. B338632 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 24, 2026) (unpublished), an appellate court—post-Hohenshelt—has reversed and remanded a case to see if the party making a missed arbitration payment under CCP § 1281.9 was culpable and
Appellate Court Did Remind Counsel They Need To Notify Courts About Bankruptcy Filings Which Might Implicate Whether The Stay Is In Place. Navellier v. Putnam, Case No. A172077 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Feb. 2, 2026 unpublished; published on Feb. 23, 2026; posted on Feb. 24, 2026) [bankruptcy discussion published; fee award entitlement and lodestar analysis
