Case Holds that Reversal Moots Appeal of Attorney’s Fees Denial Order. On July 17, 2009, the Fourth District, Division 1 certified for publication a previously unpublished decision, Costa Serena Owners Coalition v. Costa Serena Architectural Committee, Case No. D052903 (4th Dist., Div. 1 filed June 24, 2009; published July 17, 2009). This case held […]
Fees Can Be Awarded Under Labor Code section 98.2(c). An employer is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees, in an amount to be determined by the trial court, when an employee unsuccessfully appeals from a Labor Commissioner’s ruling to the trial court. (Lab. Code sec. 98.2(c).) Cooper v. Golden Gate Reporters, LLC,
Fourth District, Division 1 So Holds in Unpublished Opinion. What happens when an initial winner in a case cross-appeals a determination that denied winner an award of attorney’s fees but the appellate court eventually reverses the merits judgment in favor of initial winner? The answer is provided in Costa Serena Owners Coalition v.
Defendant’s Failure to Properly Appeal Order Precluded Substantial Review by Court of Appeal. If you are going to enter into the world of appellate practice, you must perfect your appeal by properly specifying what is being appealed. Otherwise, you are not likely to get to first base and certainly provide the reviewing court
Second District, Division 1 Discusses Technical Appeal Issues, But Also Indicates Affirmance of Award on the Merits. When you are a plaintiff winning a fee award (which you believe was not large enough), be careful to avoid a waiver of appellate rights by accepting a check payment for the fee award. That is what
First District, Division 1 Grants Writ of Mandate Because Trial Court Failed to Exercise Any Discretion on Undertaking for Substantial Cost/Fees Order. This post is somewhat complimentary to our June 12, 2009 post on Tracy v. Tracy, where a reversal and remand was required because a trial court failed to actually exercise its discretion
Third District Finds No Jurisdiction to Review Under Unusual Procedural Backdrop. In our category “Appealability,” we have canvassed many prior decisions on when an appeal of a prior merits judgment can also subsume and preserve appellate review for a subsequent postjudgment fee award liquidating the amount of the award. For example, we have looked
First District, Division 4 Applies a Cardinal Appellate Principle. As we have stressed in past posts on appellate practice, litigants needs to make sure that they provide an adequate appellate record for review of fee determinations. If they do not do so, affirmance is a foregone conclusion. The next case illustrates this well.
Fifth District Overturns Based on a Pragmatic Assessment of Litigation Results. Who says that appellate courts are not pragmatic in their assessment of who prevailed for purposes of awarding attorney’s fees? That is the law after all, and the next case is an illustration of where a cause was reversed because neither side prevailed
Second District, Division Two Applies CCP section 904.1(a)(12) in Venue Transfer Dispute. A.Z. Mashiah, Ltd. v. Christopher Ranch, LLC, Case No. B204185 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 23, 2009) (unpublished) reminds us all that only a sanctions order greater than $5,000 is immediately appealable under Code of Civil Procedure section 904.1(a)(12), one of the
