Apportionment and Mitigation Arguments Rejected By Reviewing Court. Hill v. Degery, Case No. H038874 (6th Dist. June 9, 2014) (published) is a situation where, after an earlier appeal reversing a fee denial, an LLC member was granted fees based on its statutory immunity defense that it could not be liable unless its conduct […]
However, Fee Recovery Modified to Allow Recovery Against Only Losing Signatory Defendant. Plaintiff, after losing her investment in a security, sued various parties involved in its sales and packaging, with a jury ultimately awarding her $196,058.33 on fraud, fiduciary duty breach, negligence, and negligent misrepresentation claims. The lower court then awarded $125,000 (out
Section 998 Calculation of Preoffer Fees/Costs Sealed the Result. Frontier Land Companies v. Jeld-Wen, Inc., Case No. C064351 (3d Dist. May 22, 2014) (unpublished) is a case involving contractual/indemnity claims by plaintiff residential home builder against defendant window/door subcontractor. At trial, plaintiff claimed damages of $245,066.82, but the defense countered damages were at
Fee Award Followed $201,495.14 Damages Award To Former Client of Co-Contributor Mike. For you car buffs, Canepa Design v. Mazzotta, Case No. H038631 (6th Dist. May 20, 2014) (unpublished) is a good read about a dispute over delivery of a 1958 Porsche Carrera GT, mainly focusing on whether it needed a properly functioning
No Apportionment Required Because Everything Involved Same Facts/Misconduct Allegations. Winning litigant in Sanders v. Garfield Langmoir-Logan, Case No. G048524 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 14, 2014) (unpublished) won an elder abuse claim, which has a fee-shifting statute in favor of the prevailing party under Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.5(a). The lower court
Published Part of Opinion on Fee Issues Focuses on Reasonable Hourly Rates in Court Venue. Altavion, Inc. v. Konica Minolta Systems Laboratory Inc., Case Nos. A134343/A135831 (1st Dist., Div. 5 May 8, 2014) (partially published; fee discussion on hourly rates published but rest of fee discussion unpublished) dealt with both the merits of
Not Every Attorney Must Attest to Substantiation of Hours in Fee Petition. In Anelle v. Tran, Case No. G048072 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 15, 2014) (unpublished), realtor/broker defendants defensed plaintiffs/sellers’ tort claims from a failed real estate transaction and also recovered listing compensation on a cross-claim where the listing agreement did contain
However, Sellers Were Liable To Third-Party For Losing Their Contractual/Indemnity Claims, Which Were Intertwined And Needed No Apportionment. Real estate buyer lost tort/statutorily-based nondisclosure claims to the sellers in a dispute where a purchase agreement had a fees clause mandating fees in an action brought “with respect to the subject matter of enforcement
Even a Partial Reversal Can See a Substantial Fee Award Goes POOF! City of Novato v. Morgan, Case No. A130899 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 27, 2014) (unpublished) involved the scope of personal guaranties to perform under two residential subdivision agreements. In prior litigation not involving the two guaranties, City was successful in
Matter Remanded for New Apportionment. In Deven v. Dynamic Auto Images, Case No. G048064 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 22, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiff dismissed a harassment lawsuit which contained some tort and contractual claims. Defendant moved to recover some attorney’s fees under Labor Code section 218.5, an unpaid wage fee-shifting statute, with the
