Cases: Appealability

Appealability: Both Sides’ Appeal From Fee Denial Orders Nonappealable Because Trial Judge Granted New Trial Conditionally, With Additur Which Was Not Accepted

Cases: Appealability

  Result Was Original Judgment Was Vacated, So No Postjudgment Fee Orders Existed.      In Pacific Corp. Group Holdings, LLC v. Keck, Case No. D062277 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 12, 2014) (published), defendant/cross-complainant employee won a substantial $270,547.95 breach of contract verdict against cross-defendant employer. However, he moved for a new trial motion arguing […]

Appealability: Stipulation Allowing For Further Litigation By Parties Meant Two Other Interveners Properly Denied Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Appealability

  No Appealable Order, Collateral Order Exception Did Not Apply, And Appellate Court Not Willing To Treat As Writ Petition.      Sierra Club and Carmel River Steelhead Association obviously were upset when a lower court denied their private attorney general fee request to recoup $256,934 in fees under CCP § 1021.5.      However, that denial

Appealability/Section 998: Loser’s Failure To Appeal Postjudgment Cost-Shifting Order Waived Challenge To Order Denying Tax Costs Motion

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Section 998

  Gotta Separately Appeal the Postjudment Order.      Albert v. Baccouche, Case No. B249798 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 2, 2014) (unpublished) is yet another reminder of what we have harped on in many posts: separately appeal a postjudgment costs/fee order in order to preserve a challenge to the order. Here, litigant hit with some

Appeal Sanctions/SLAPP: $18,456.58 Fee/Costs Award Affirmed To Defense Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: SLAPP

  Appellate Court Found No Abuse of Discretion, Given Trial Court Reduced From Requested $39,104.58 Fees/Costs—However, 1.5 Multiplier Was Proper.      In Meaux v. Springfield, Case No. A139840 (1st Dist., Div. 5 July 16, 2014) (unpublished), defense prevailing on a SLAPP motion requested $39,104.58 in fees/costs (inclusive of a 2.0 multiplier, but not for “fees

Appealability/Equity/Sanctions: In Pro Per Litigant Denied $31,000 In Compensatory Legal Fees When Trial Judge Discretionary Granted Relief From Default

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Equity, Cases: Sanctions

Lower Court Did Not Err In Directing That $1,000 Penalty Be Paid By Party Requesting Default Relief to Superior Court Instead. ​In Sanai v. Pfeiffer, Case No. B246349 (2d Dist., Div. 4 June 26, 2014) (unpublished), an in pro per attorney sued an ex-client defendant for $149,240 in legal fees. However, the defense filed a

Appealability/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Defense Properly Denied Attorney’s Fees Because She Was Not The Clear Winner

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Easement Dispute Produced Mixed Result, Likely More Pro-Plaintiffs In Nature. ​This one involved a water well easement dispute by adjoining owners, prompting a suit by plaintiffs when defendant locked the pump house and put up a “no trespassing” sign. The lower court ultimately upheld plaintiffs’ right to use of some water from the well, but

Appealability/Prevailing Party: Defense Appealing Only Judgment, But Not Separate Fee Award, Could Challenge Fee Award

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Prevailing Party

  However, Defense Challenges Did Not Prevail On Appeal.      In Polaris Medical Academy, LLC v. Allen, Case No. G045800 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 24, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiffs won a judgment totaling $450,000 against various defendants, with the judgment stating “Plaintiffs shall recover costs in the amount of $___________ and attorneys’ fees in the

Appealability/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Because Lower Court Erred In Sustaining Demurrer, Party Garnering Fee Award Was Not Prevailing Party

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  $22,230 Fee Award Went POOF!      In Vestar/Kimco Tustin, L.P. V. Sesar, Case No. G048831 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 30, 2014) (unpublished), the lower court sustained a demurrer to a breach of lease action and overruled a demurrer to a breach of guaranty cause of action, with plaintiff filing a voluntary dismissal of

Scroll to Top