Plaintiff’s Appeal Of The Later Judgment Incorporating Fees Was Appealable, But Lower Court’s $62,500 Fee Award Was No Abuse Of Discretion. In Norman v. Ross, Case Nos. B316971 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 4 Apr. 23, 2024) (partially published; fee discussion not published), three defendants won a SLAPP motion on plaintiff’s claims, while two […]
Two Fundamental Appellate Principles Supported Affirmance Of The Fee Award. Inadequate record and waiver arguments can really undermine an appellant’s arguments on appeal. That is what happened in Milks v. Affirmed Technologies, LLC, Case No. B330311 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 8, 2024) (unpublished). There, plaintiff challenged a contractual fee award after his case
Opinion Validates Our Recommendation In Many Posts To Separately Appeal An Adverse Fee Order Or Appeal Both Rulings In A Combined Appeal If Possible. In Williams v. Doctors Med. Center of Modesto, Inc., Case Nos. F084700 et al. (5th Dist. Mar. 27, 2024) (published), plaintiff separately appealed the granting of a SLAPP motion and
No Substantial Modification Was Obtained By Adding Costs To A Judgment. In Crokin v. Primrose, Case No. G061959 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 3, 2024) (unpublished), authored by Presiding Justice O’Leary, the 4/3 DCA agreed that adding routine costs, attorney’s fees, and interest to an original judgment through an amended judgment did not reset
No Final Judgment Was Entered, And Collateral Order Doctrine Did Not Apply Because The Fee Order Did Not Order Payment Of Money By Partially Prevailing Cross-Defendant. Cross-defendant in Delis v. Thorn, Case No. F084879 (5th Dist. Dec. 26, 2023) (unpublished) successfully SLAPP-ed 4 out of 5 cross-claims, moved for mandatory SLAPP fees, and was
Additional Defendants Were Unified In Interest With Other Defendants Subject To The Fee Award. To recover attorney’s fees under the private attorney general statute, CCP § 1021.5, the plaintiff must recover against “opposing parties.” Taft v. Salinas, Case No. D081025 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 30, 2023) (unpublished) considered the scope of that language
As We Have Said Before, Always Separately Appeal A Postjudgment Fee Order. Drooyan v. Action Property Mgt. Co., Inc., Case No. B314211 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Nov. 30, 2023) (unpublished) is yet another case indicating what numerous posts have shown in appellate decisions since we began doing this blog in May 2008: to be
It Did Not Matter, Because SLAPP Denial Was Affirmed On Appeal. Freeman v. LMA & SAI 1433 Wilshire LLC, Case No. B325212 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Nov. 9, 2023) (unpublished) goes to show you that you may hurdle procedural appealability obstacles, only to have the merits affirmed anyway. In this one, the procedural
It Is Appealable From A Final Judgment, Although There Is A Split In DCA Thinking On The Issue. In Arteaga v. California Restaurants, Inc., Case No. D082258 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 17, 2023) (unpublished), plaintiff filed a CCP § 128.7 sanctions motion which was denied in a class action case, prompting an appeal.
However, Ex-Wife’s Appeal From The Final Judgment Was Timely Because the Interim Order Denying Fees Was Not A Separately Appealable Order. The main lesson from Marriage of Davis, Case No. D080980 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 18, 2023) (unpublished) is a simple one: if you are seeking fees, make sure you have a fee
