Author name: William M. (Mike) Hensley

Section 998: Personal Injury Plaintiff, In Low Collision Bike-Car Accident, Properly Was Assessed With $99,800 In Costs After Rejecting A 998 Offer Of $20,000 In The Wake Of A Subsequent Defense Jury Verdict

Cases: Section 998

Most Of The Costs Were Expert Witness Fees. Although attorney’s fees in California are rarely at issue in normal personal injury cases, CCP section 998 can be a cost-shifting statute of significance for either side given that expert fee expenses can be significant and can be awarded to the “winner” of a well-crafted 998 offer—all

Arbitration: Study Of FINRA Arbitration Awards From 2015-2024 Has Some Interesting Statistical Findings

Cases: Arbitration

Arbitration Fee Awards Are Spiking Upwards Over The Years. Arbitrator-X.com has an interesting statistical survey of attorney’s fees awards in Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINDRA) arbitrations for the  10-year period of January 1, 2015-December 31, 2024, surveying 1,231 cases with fee awards.  Only about 15% of FINDA arbitration awards include fee awards, likely because they

Off Topics, Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeal Finds That Expert Testimony And An Evidentiary Hearing Are Not Required Before A Lower Court Can Fashion An Attorney’s Fees Award

Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees, Off Topics

Although Only Applicable To Certain Florida Counties, It Is More In Line With California And Federal Approaches. Although we usually concentrate on California cases, the Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal (governing over around 10 Central Florida counties) in Ruffenach v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 431 So.3d 1055 (Fla. App., 6th Dist. 2026) rejected a six-decades

Sanctions: Orange County Superior Court’s Appellate Division Publishes Order Sanctioning Defendant’s Attorneys For Filing Briefs With AI Hallucinations

Cases: Sanctions

End Of The Order Makes Clear That The Appellate Division Will Report Imposition Of Sanctions On This Issue To The California State Bar. In Southland Homes & Real Estate and Investment, LLC v. Lam, Case No. 30-2026-01569207 (Orange County Super. Ct., App. Div. modified opinion Aug. 5, 2026; posted Sept. 10, 2026) (published), Presiding Judge Kimberly

Employment, Multipliers: Plaintiff Prevailing Under California’s Whistleblower Statutes Correctly Was Awarded Over $2.92 Million In Fees And $210,000 In Costs

Cases: Employment, Cases: Multipliers

Defendant’s Challenge To Application Of A 1.5 Positive Multiplier Was Rebuffed On Appeal. The California Whistleblower Protection Act (CWPA), Gov. Code section 8547 et seq., has a mandatory prevailing party fee-shifting provision allowing reasonable attorney’s fees as provided by law to a party prevailing on a cause of action under CWPA.  (See section 8547.10(c).)  This

Family Law: After Making Findings That Husband Had Better Access To Funds And Wife Had Overlitigated The Dissolution Case, Appellate Court Affirmed Lower Court’s Decision To Have Husband Waive A Spousal Support Overcharge In Consideration Of Waiving His Lesser Section 2030 Award To Wife

Cases: Family Law

Husband’s Waiver Of A $12,750 Spousal Support Overpayment By Husband In Return For Foregoing Payment Of An Additional 2030 Award Of $4,000 To Wife Was A Reasonable Result. We liked Marriage of Mackey, Case No. B349404 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 10, 2026) (unpublished) because it seemed to do “rough justice” in a case where ex-wife

Appealability, Landlord/Tenant, Non-Signatories, Reasonableness Of Fees:  Prevailing Defendant Tenants, Including Two Non-Signatory Occupants, Properly Were Awarded Contractual Attorney’s Fees Under Lease Provisions When Defendants Defensed Plaintiff Landlord’s Unlawful Detainer Action Based On An Invalid Three Day-Notice

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Landlord/Tenant, Cases: Nonsignatories, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Fee Award Was $50,000, A Contractually Capped Amount, Even Though Defendants’ Counsel Expended $73,865 In Fees. In SM 10000 Property, LLC v. Chakchay, Case No. B350752 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 9, 2026) (unpublished), plaintiff landlord filed an unlawful detainer action against defendant signatory tenant and two other non-signatory tenants named as occupants.  The lower court

Choice of Law, Prevailing Party: Where Plaintiffs Dismissed Contractual Claims, A Defendant Was Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees In The Suit, Excluding Prior SLAPP Fee Recovery, Because Defendant Forfeited The Claim That New York Law Applied By Using California Law At Important Junctures Of The Litigation

Cases: Choice of Law, Cases: Prevailing Party

Defendant’s Fee Request Was For Around $3.215 Million. Although this litigation was fierce, with defense parties winning SLAPP fees and contractual fees under California law, one defendant who never raised a conflict of law issue in previous crucial junctures was not allowed a substantial attorney’s fees recovery because it never argued clearly before the fee

Sanctions: D.C. Circuit Sanctions An Appellee In A Federal Appeal By Striking Its Responding Brief For Containing AI Hallucinations

Cases: Sanctions

In A Per Curiam Published Order, Concurring Justice Touches On Some Other Issues In The Case. The D.C. Circuit federal appeals court has published a per curiam order in Douglas v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., No. 2023-CAB-005422 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 3, 2026) where it sanctioned a firm representing an appellee (federal parlance for respondent, if

Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Six Plaintiffs Obtaining A $3.85 Million Jury Verdict After Seven Years Of Litigation Were Awarded $4,815,033.25 In Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Fee-Shifting Statute Was A Provision In The Trafficking Victims Protection Act. In Moore, et al. v. Rubin, No. 25-613-v (2d Dist. Sept. 4, 2026), the Second Circuit was reviewing an attorney’s fees award under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), which has a provision allowing a prevailing plaintiff to obtain recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees, scrutinizing

Scroll to Top