. . . Inclusive Of A Total Of $957,640.27 In Fees And Costs Award Components. Arbitration awards, even if wrong on the merits, are difficult to overturn based on the latitude afforded arbitrators in the absent of an arbitration agreement requiring more stringent protocols. Shifrin v. Strata Equity Global, Inc., Case No. D085526 (4th Dist., […]
A Final Determination Was Made: Client Prevailed, And To The Victor Went The Spoils –Substantial Attorney’s Fees. Once again, Law Finance Group, LLC v. Key, Case Nos. B338733 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 2 Apr. 27, 2026) (unpublished) confirms that the victor in arbitration proceedings, which may entail having to overturn an adverse arbitration award
Fee Issues Depended On Further Actions. In O’Leary v. Jones III, Case No. D085327 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 24, 2026) (published), the Court of Appeal confirmed a denial of attorney’s fees to an arbitration respondent, who was never joined in a court action before the matter was ordered to arbitration such that the
Dissenting Justice Saw Things Differently: Superior Court Had To Independently Determine MFAA Award Issue Or Remand To The Arbitrator To Decide. Allan Law Group, P.C. v. Stewart, Case No. B333681 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 20, 2026) (unpublished) involves an interesting intersection between Mandatory Fee Arbitration Act (MFAA) and California Arbitration Act (CAA) principles where
However, Remand Was Ordered To See If Severance Could Allow Arbitration To Proceed. In Foster v. Liberty Military Housing Holdings, LLC, Case No. D085268 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 4, 2026; posted Mar. 5, 2026) (unpublished), an employment agreement had an arbitration clause with the following fees and costs provisions: “If required by law applicable
A Broad By-Law Fees/Cost Clause, The Davis-Stirling Act, And JAMS Cost Provision Amply Justified The Arbitration Award Which Was Confirmed As A Judgment. The next post illustrates a familiar ending story in many homeowner-HOA disputes, whether brough in court or in arbitration: a prevailing party will face the prospect of obtaining substantial recoupment of attorney’s
Trial Judge Needed To Assess Culpability And Whether Missed Payment Was Excusable. In Aqua Blue Constr., Inc. v. Goshorn, Case No. B338632 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 24, 2026) (unpublished), an appellate court—post-Hohenshelt—has reversed and remanded a case to see if the party making a missed arbitration payment under CCP § 1281.9 was culpable and
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
