Cases: Allocation

Allocation, Probate: $441,295.63 Fee Award Under Probate Code Section 859, Which Incorporates Mandatory Elder Abuse Fee Shifting, Affirmed Against Removed Trustee On Appeal

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Probate

No Apportionment Required Because Elder Abuse and Fiduciary Duty Breach Claims Were Intertwined.             In Keading v. Keading, Case No. A153628 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 28, 2023) (unpublished), a beneficiary successfully obtained an elder abuse finding and successfully removed a trustee under Probate Code section 850, which allows a probate judge under related Probate […]

Allocation, Trade Secrets: $299,647.50 Fee Award Against Plaintiff For Bringing A Frivolous Trade Secret Misappropriate Case Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Trade Secrets

Lower Court Did Reduce The Fee Request About $121,000 In Fashioning Its Award.             We have a category “Trade Secrets” describing some fairly hefty fee “sanctions” awards under Civil Code section 3426.4, part of the California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act.  To this list can be added the award in SASCO v. CSI Electrical Contractors, Inc.,

Allocation: 4/3 DCA Affirms Trial Court’s Apportionment Of Plaintiffs’ Fee Award Between Both Contractor And Subcontractor Where Subcontractor’s Contract With Plaintiffs Did Not Provide For Fee Recovery

Cases: Allocation

Statutory Basis Supported Plaintiff’s Recovery of Attorney Fees Directly From Subcontractor.             In Nassif v. Mission Pools of Escondido, Case No. G060433 (4th Dist., Div. 3 December 5, 2022) (unpublished), swimming pool contractor and subcontractor were sued for substandard work relating to the design and construction of a swimming pool.  Pursuant to the global

Allocation, Appealability, Partition: $790,967 Postjudgment Fees And Environmental Remediation Award Against Some Partitioning Parties Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Appealability, Cases: Partition

Lower Court Retains Lots Of Discretion To Apportion Fees in Partition Action.             DeMartini v. DeMartini, Case No. A160849 (1st Dist., Div. 1 June 7, 2022) (unpublished) is a reminder that the partition statutes allow a trial judge broad authority to award and apportion fees to parties in a partition action.  In this one, the

Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation: Plaintiff Owner Losing A Variety Of Intertwined Claims Arising From A Home Improvement Contract Was Properly Assessed With Contractual Party Fees As Against The Home Improvement Installer

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Installer Was Awarded $1,223 In Costs And $95,531.68 In Attorney’s Fees.             Plaintiff owner sued a home installer on various contractual, tort, and statutory theories for a job of under $4,000, with there being a home improvement contract with a fees clause covering performance issues under the contract.  Owner lost across the board, with the

Allocation, Landlord/Tenant, Retainer Agreements: $910,752.50 Fee Award Under San Francisco Rent Ordinance Fee-Shifting Clause Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Landlord/Tenant, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Trial Judge Did Reduce Requested Lodestar By More Than $70,000—About 60% Of The Request, Although Refusing To Award A Positive 1.5 Multiplier.             Landlords in Duncan v. Kihagi, Case No. A154678 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 6, 2021) (unpublished), were not pleased when a trial judge awarded $910,752.50 in fees in favor of the winning

Allocation: Where Prevailing Litigant Failed To Apportion Compensable And Non-Compensable Fees Where Governing Documents Required A Causal Connection To The Contracts, The Lower Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion In Denying Fees Altogether

Cases: Allocation

Practice Tip—Think About Apportioning To Avoid The Result Here!             Stifano v. Slaga, Case No. D077865 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 17, 2021) (unpublished) is an example of a case which we do not see often:  a trial judge denying attorney’s fees altogether when a party did not apportion them between compensable and non-compensable claims.

Allocation, Indemnity, Section 1717, Seriously: 4/1 DCA Affirms $6,000 Damages Award And $143,183.55 Out Of Requested $572,730.11 § 1717 Fees To Prevailing Breach Of Contract Plaintiff Who Proved $1,463,745 In Damages At Trial

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Indemnity, Cases: Section 1717, Seriously

Plaintiff’s Failure To Conduct Due Diligence Prior To Entering Into Commercial Lease And Failure To Mitigate Damages Once Problems Arose Left Him Upside-Down By More Than A Million Dollars When All Was Said And Done             Sherwood v. Vogele, Case No. D076776 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 7, 2021) (unpublished) highlights the importance of

Allocation, Multipliers, Section 1717, Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Reversal And Remand Were In Order Where Trial Court Believed It Did Not Have Authority To Apply A Negative Multiplier In An Award Of Attorney Fees

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Invoices Submitted In Support Of Plaintiff’s § 1717 Fees Motion Were Extensively Redacted And Contained Vague Block-Billing, Which Offered The Trial Court No Way To Meaningfully Apportion Time Between Causes Of Action.             After defeating defendant’s cross-claim breach of contract cause of action, plaintiff moved for Civ. Code § 1717 attorney fees of $939,600.50, which

Scroll to Top