Although Remanded, Facts Suggested A Possible Delay Because Of A Calamity Evacuation By Defense Counsel. As we have said before, the CCP § 1281.98 defense missed payment deadline for employer/employee cases have resulted in many reversals and remands. That also occurred in Colon-Perez v. Security Industry Specialists, Case No. A168297 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Feb. […]
Total Fees to Law Firm Came To $416,680.30. Fee-shifting can be a game changer in litigation, including litigation relating to an arbitration where the fees clause is broad in nature. Plaintiff client learned that lesson all too well in litigation against his former counsel, as demonstrated by Milder v. Holley, Case No. B331152 (2d Dist.,
Lower Court’s Denial Of Post-Judgment Vacatur Fees To Prevailing Plaintiff/Employee Was Justified. In Fishman v. Advisors LLP, Case No. B334179 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Jan. 15, 2026) (unpublished), a couple of former lawyers/nonequity partners sued their former law firm for compensation and over the validity of a non-compete clause. There were various proceedings; however, one
Opinion Held That A Prevailing Party In A Discrete Proceeding To Obtain A Replacement Arbitrator Is Entitled To Contractual Attorney’s Fees Award. On December 22, 2025, we posted on Barbanell v. Lodge, Case No. D081493 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 17, 2025), which was unpublished at the time. It held that a prevailing party in
Employer Paid Expenses 7 Days Late. The 2/6 DCA, in line with other intermediate appellate courts, remanded a decision not excusing an employer from paying arbitration expenses within 30 days, in Doe v. Lawyers for Employee and Consumer Rights, Case No. B330052 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Dec. 23, 2025) (unpublished), referencing Hohenshelt, 18 Cal.5th 310.
Circumstances Did Not Fall Into “Legally Dispositive Facts” Vacatur Principle. In VIP Mortgage Incorporated v. Gates, No. 24-7624 (9th Cir. Dec. 22, 2025) (published), a vacatur request was denied where an arbitration award granted attorney’s fees and costs to a plaintiff on the defense’s counterclaims even though the parties had stipulated that fees and costs
Prematurity Arguments Were Rebuffed. In Barbanell v. Lodge, Case No. D084193 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 17, 2025) (unpublished), the parties entered into a settlement agreement to resolve a longstanding water rights dispute, with the settlement agreement having an attorney’s fees clause allowing a prevailing party in a lawsuit arising out of the settlement to
Concurring Justice Suggests That Discovery Might Be Appropriate For Scrutiny Of Employer’s Failure To Timely Pay. Howard v. Koulax Enterprises, Case No. B335329 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Dec. 16, 2025) (unpublished) is yet another appellate decision remanding a case to the lower court after an employer litigant failed to timely pay arbitration expenses, with the
Remand Was To Determine If Employer Had An Excuse For Untimely Payment And Whether Employee Suffered Compensable Harm. Our local Santa Ana appellate court, in Pontes v. Intelliloan, Inc., Case No.. G064585 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 16, 2025) (unpublished), has joined an emerging majority of appellate courts in remanding, post-Hohenshelt v. Superior, 18 Cal.5th
Facts Are Not Clear Cut To Require A Reversal As A Matter Of Law As In Recent 2/1 DCA Wilson Opinion. We accurately did predict that, post-Hohenshelt, many trial court decisions would be remanded to see if the employer had reasonable excuses to make untimely arbitration payment of expenses under CCP § 1287.97. That prediction
