Cases: Allocation

Allocation/Employment/Landlord-Tenant/Section 1717: Wild Landlord/Tenant And Minimum Wage Earner Battle Means All Fee Awards Had To Be Reversed

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Employment, Cases: Landlord/Tenant, Cases: Section 1717

  Rental Inhabitability Battles Are Contractual, Giving Rise to 1717 Fee Exposure, While Limited Success On Minimum Wage Mandatory Fee-Shifting Claims Requires Apportionment and Possible Reduction.       This next case is hard to pigeonhole, because it involves cross-over issues in the Landlord/Tenant and Employment post sites. However, Staley v. Carlson, Case No. A133115 (1st Dist., […]

Allocation/Fee Clause Interpretation/Prevailing Party: Broadly-Worded Fees Clause Allowed For Recovery Of Fees On Noncontract Claims Following Voluntary Dismissal In Wake Of Pleading Motions

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Fee Motion Properly Filed and No Allocation Between Claims Required.      Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its contract-based/tortious interference case against one defendant without prejudice in the wake of pending pleading motions, with the trial court determining that fully requested fees of $16,926 were due to prevailing defendant.      Plaintiff’s multi-pronged attack in Oxnard Corner, LLC

Allocation/Costs/Prevailing Party: Wine Cellar Gets Hit With $28,659.50 Contract Damages Plus Prejudgment Interest PLUS $36,061.50 In Contractual Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Costs, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Plaintiff Got Unqualified Win, With No Apportionment Needed; Two Winning Defendants Failed To Timely File For Costs.      This case stirred our curiosity, because it involves Veris Cellars, which appears to be a very nice winery located in the Paso Robles area in San Luis Obispo County. However, no matter who the litigant, beware

Allocation/Reasonableness Of Fees: On Remand, $68,898 Apportioned Fees Out Of $179,000 Original Request Found Justified

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Originally, Only $1,050 Ordered, But Apportioned Amount Went Up When New Judge Assigned to Fix Fees on Remand.      This case has an interesting history, including a prior appeal which resulted in this decision after the case was remanded and attorneys’ fees were “re-fixed.” However, the post-remand appellate decision does have some great pointers

Allocation/Employment/Trade Secrets: Wage Nonpayment And Trade Secret Misappropriation Fee Recoveries To Prevailing Defendants Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Employment, Cases: Trade Secrets

  Interrelatedness of Contract/Wage Nonpayment Administrative Proceedings and Trade Secret Bad Faith Justified Sustaining of Lower Court Awards.      Plaintiff lost both DLSE administrative proceedings and a breach of contract/trade secret case against various defendants, with the lower court then awarding one defendant Labor Code section 98.2 fees of $43,881.25 for winning the DLSE appeal/beating

Allocation/Section 1717: Fee Clause In Forbearance Agreement Triggered To Allow Fee Recovery For Non-Contract Claim When Defense Based On Agreement Was In Play

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

  $181,933 “Generous” Fee Award Not Out of Bounds.      LA Open Door Presbyterian Church v. Evangelical Christian Credit Union, Case No. B246853 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 4, 2013) (unpublished) is a situation where a defendant was voluntarily dismissed from a suit involving a contract (a written forbearance agreement with a fees clause). Although

Allocation/Section 1717: Plaintiff’s Failure To Prevail Upon Successor Liability Theory Justified Attorney’s Fees Award To Claimed Successor

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

  Fee Clauses Not Broad Enough to Support Tort Claim Wins, So Case Remanded to Fix Fees And Determine If Any Apportionment Necessary.      Brown Bark III, L.P. v. Haver, Case No. G047198 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 26, 2013) (unpublished) involved a defendant alleged to be the continuation of a defunct defendant signatory to

Allocation/Lodestar/Reasonableness Of Fees: Former Employee Losing Wage/Hour Claims Hit With $150,519.36 Adverse Fee Award

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Hourly Rates by Defense Were Reasonable; No Apportionment Required.      Plaintiff, a former employee, sued defendant former employer for unpaid commissions, vacation time, and unreimbursed expenses, requesting an award of attorney’s fees upon prevailing under Labor Code sections 218.5 and 218.6 (wage/hour fee-shifting provisions). Plaintiff brought four causes of action, one of which was

Costs/Section 998: Winning 998 Winner Did Not Have To Allocate Costs Among “Lockstep” Plaintiffs In Costs Memorandum Where Plaintiffs Were Represented By Same Attorney

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 998

  Apportionment May Be Required In Response to Motion to Tax Costs, But Trial Court Erred By Not Allowing Allocation After Raising Apportionment Objection Sua Sponte.      Justice Bedsworth, for a 3-0 panel, held in Morris v. Wilson, Case No. G047534 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 20, 2013) (unpublished) that a defendant is not required

Scroll to Top