Second and Sixth District Cases Show That Appellate Record Can Be The Key to Success on Appeal. Needs-Based Fee Award Is Reversed and Remanded In Marriage of Rothe, Case No. B202733 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Nov. 20, 2008) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal reversed and remanded a lump sum fee award of $92,552.86 in […]
Third District, in Unpublished Decision, May Have Parted Company From Fourth District, Division Two’s View on the Issue. In our June 7, 2008 post, we reviewed P R Burke Corp. v. Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Auth., 98 Cal.App.4th 1047, 1050, 1055 (2002), where the Fourth District, Division Two held that an appellant preserved review
Fourth District, Division One Refuses to Consider the Fee Grant Issue. Cross-complainant failed to beat an anti-SLAPP motion and was ordered to pay successful cross-defendants $3,998 in attorney's fees and $80.00 in other costs. The final judgment granting the anti-SLAPP motion was silent as to both entitlement to or amount of fees
Plaintiff's Appeal of Anti-SLAPP Fee Denial Was Premature. A plaintiff successfully opposing an anti-SLAPP motion may be entitled to attorney's fees if the motion is determined to have been frivolous or brought solely for the purpose of furthering unnecessary delay. Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16(c). In the case discussed below, defendant lost
Sixth District Refuses to Review Adverse Fee Order Based on Plaintiff’s Failure to Timely Appeal under CRC 8.104 Plaintiff lost a motion to set aside a judicially supervised stipulated judgment in a roadway easement action. One of the defendants was granted attorney’s fees for defending the motion under a contractual fees
However, Prevailing Party’s Anti-SLAPP Win Is Overturned, With a Resulting Reversal of the Fee Award. A notary was named in a conspiracy-charging civil lawsuit brought by a disgruntled plaintiff arising out of a loan he made to others on a series of real estate transactions. Plaintiff charged that the notary failed
We Clarify a Good Question on Past Posts on Appellate Decisions in the Area. Mark Hooshmand of The Hooshmand Law Group in San Francisco sent us a good question on our August 25, 2008 post discussion of Carr Business Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Chowchilla, Case No. F051999 (Aug. 20, 2008)
First and Fourth Districts Overturn Fee Awards After Reversal of Underlying Judgments. Reversals of underlying judgments can also mean that attorney’s fees awards are vacated or remanded if properly appealed, as the next two cases illustrate. The First District, Division Four, in Arntz Builders v. City of
Court of Appeal Affirms Denial of Attorney’s Fees to Prevailing Parties Against the City of Chowchilla. In our July 12, 2008 post, we discussed when contract indemnification clauses will and will not be interpreted as allowing a recovery of attorney’s fees to litigants in litigation not involving true third-party indemnity issues.
Proprietor’s Ratification Triggered Fee Liability to Conservator When House Sold For Less Than Its Fair Market Value. Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.5 has a mandatory fee-shifting provision that authorizes an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs (including conservator’s fees devoted to litigation) when a defendant is proven liable for
