Rule 43(d)(ii) Is The Trap. American Arbitration Association’s (“AAA”) Commercial Arbitration Rule 43(d)(ii) provides: “The award of the arbitrator may include: … (ii) an award of attorneys’ fees if all parties have requested such an award or it is authorized by law or their arbitration agreement.”(Emphasis added.) Paul R. Wood and Thomas […]
Denial Of Fees Would Ignore Realities of “Dual Track” Arbitration/Court Realities Of Modern Litigation. Mesa Shopping Center-East, LLC v. O Hill, Case No. G049205 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 23, 2014) (published) is an interesting case involving the propriety of Civil Code section 1717 court fees where there is a “dual track” case,
$55,698 Fee Award Justified Based On Broad Fees Clause in Operating Agreement. Fiscal Funding Co., Inc. v. Dones, Case No. A135451 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 15, 2014) (unpublished) involved a $55,698 fee award by the superior court to a party to an arbitration successfully defending an arbitrator’s disqualification order in superior court
Court Does Not Decide Whether Contractual Provision Limiting Arbitrator’s Power To Apply Definition Of “Prevailing Party” Other Than Found In Agreement Would Be Unenforceable As Violative Of Public Policy. Does an arbitrator who applies the statutory definition of “prevailing party” found in Civil Code Section 1717(b)(1), rather than than the definition the parties contractually
Arbitrator Did Not Exceed His Powers By Enforcing Oral Fee Splitting Arrangement Attorneys Cohen and Sheinkopf had an oral agreement to split client fees: 75% to Cohen, 25% to Sheinkopf. After the two attorneys went their separate ways, they arbitrated a fee dispute in which the arbitrator enforced their oral fee splitting agreement, resulting
Arbitrator Did Exceed Powers in Correcting Awards on a Merits Issue, Especially Where JAMS Rule Did Not Allow For Reconsideration/Revisions of a Final Award. Cooper v. Lavely & Singer Professional Corp., Case No. B251508 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Sept. 26, 2014) (published) is an important decision on correction and revisions of initial “final”
$308,383.72 Fee Recovery Affirmed On Appeal. In Ito v. Ito, Case No. A136513 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 24, 2014) (unpublished), one party, in an LLC dissolution case, received $461,958 plus title to 3 properties, while second party received $20,092 plus title to one property in litigation with fee-shifting clauses in LLC operating
Successful Party in Arbitration, Suffering Setback on Appeal, Was Not a Prevailing Party. In Guerra v. Aurora Loan Services, LLC, Case No. H038813 (6th Dist. Sept. 19, 2014) (unpublished), a lower court denied a successful arbitration litigant his fees in connection with an equally successful petition to confirm the arbitration award. The trial
Arbitrator Decisions Get a Lot of Deference. HP Production, Inc. v. McDonald, Case No. B252175 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 5, 2014) (unpublished) is a case where a former nanny for Adam Sandler’s children lost an arbitration by which she had to disgorge money paid under a former confidential settlement and was hit
Arbitration Fee Clause Broad Enough to Encompass Torts, and Trope Waiver Clause Enforced For Judicial Confirmation Recovery Fees By Law Firm Personnel. This next 2-1 decision, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan v. Kurtin, Case No. B250245 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Jul. 28, 2014) (unpublished), is an interesting one involving affirmance of an arbitration
