Cases: Arbitration

Arbitration/Prevailing Party: Trial And Appellate Fees Incurred In Successfully Opposing Petition For Arbitration Were Premature

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Merits Were Yet To Be Decided.      Cellphone Termination Fee Cases, Case Nos. A136818 and A138424 (1st Dist., Div. 5 June 24, 2014) (both unpublished) were situations where plaintiff successfully opposing a petition to compel arbitration by Sprint obtained very substantial trial and appellate fees for prevailing at this “interim” stage of the overall […]

Arbitration/Indemnity/Section 1717: Individual Deleted From Arbitration Properly Denied Requested Fees Of $109,000 And Requested Costs Of $10,700

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Indemnity, Cases: Section 1717

  No Clear Fee Entitlement In This One.      Individual who was deleted from an arbitration award, because he was neither served nor consented to an arbitration, was frustrated because the lower court denied him fees under an arbitration agreement provision and AAA Rules in Fujian Peak Group, Inc. v. Huang, Case No. D063296 (4th

Arbitration Under MFAA/Section 1717: $56,350 Fee Recovery Based Under MFAA And Section 1717 Affirmed In Favor Of Attorney Successfully Suing To Collect Receivable

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Section 1717

  Trope Prohibition Not in Play Because Suing Attorneys Used Independent Contractors, Not Associates, to Prosecute Case.      The opinion in Rothman v. Deshay, Case No. B245075 (2d Dist., Div. 4 May 13, 2014) (unpublished) gives guidance on how attorneys prosecuting or defending themselves in litigation can use other attorneys and avoid the Trope prohibition

Arbitration: Second District, Division Four, Affirms Judgment Confirming Attorney’s Fees Award And Liquidated Damages Against Attorney

Cases: Arbitration

The Arbitrator’s Award Assessing Fees, Costs, And Expenses Ran Only Against The Attorney, Not The Client      The highly deferential standard of review given to an arbitrator’s award, encompassing as it does the arbitrator’s resolution of questions of law or fact, largely explains the result in Kaufman v. Diskeeper Corporation, B247315 (2nd Dist. Div. 4

Arbitration: Post-Arbitration Trial Court Decision Awarding Substantial Attorney’s Fees To Defense Reversed Because Arbitrator Awarded No Fees To Either Side

Cases: Arbitration

  Arbitral Finality Rule Violated, If Trial Court Could Award Arbitration Fees Never Conferred By Arbitrator.      FEHA plaintiff was forced to arbitrate her case, but was “defensed” in the arbitration although the arbitrator did not assess any attorney’s fees or costs against her. However, the defense moved to recover fees and costs, with the

Arbitration/Judgment Enforcement: Parties’ “High/Low” Pre-Arbitration Agreement Enforced Where Losing Party Honored Arrangement And Was Erroneously Denied Benefit of Judgment Satisfaction Acknowledgment Procedure

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Judgment Enforcement

  Losing Party Played It Well All Along the Way.      Looks like the appellate courts have been facing a lot of post-judgment enforcement fee issues lately, as recent posts have demonstrated. Here is another one to add to the list.      Horath v. Hess, Case Nos. D063124/D063709 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 10, 2014)

Arbitration: Former Co-Counsel And Former Clients Law Waived Any Right To Arbitrate Against Former Co-Counsel Protesting Over Post-Settlement Fee Split

Cases: Arbitration

  Tons of Litigation Before Moving to Arbitrate Constituted a Clear Waiver.      Justice Bedsworth, on behalf of a 3-0 panel in Eagan Avenatti, LLP, et al. v. Stroll, et al., Case No. G048143 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 28, 2014) (unpublished), sustained a lower court ruling that former co-counsel and former clients had waived

Arbitration: Arbitration Clause Saying “Each Side Bear Own Fees/Costs” Did Not Prevent Fee Recovery In Favor Of Prevailing Arbitration Party

Cases: Arbitration

  Each Side’s Arbitration Submissions Allowed Arbitrator to Award Fees–Invited Error, Pure and Simple.      Here is an interesting case from our local appellate court affirming a substantial attorney’s fees award, even though based on dubious grounds, because both parties invited consideration of the relief in their own pleadings before the arbitrator.      In Vadim

Scroll to Top