Fourth District, Division Three Dismisses Clients’ Appeal. Clients filed a petition for attorney’s fee arbitration pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 6200 et seq. They won, with their Former Attorney ordered to return $150,000 in fees and $3,524 in attorney’s fees. Former Attorney was not happy and petitioned to vacate the award,
Sixth District So Rules In Sustaining Fee Award For Some Work By Winning Litigant’s Attorneys Before and After Arbitration Proceeding. Defendant suffered an adverse arbitration award of $67,089.16 to plaintiff for failing to pay plaintiff his value in a health center pursuant to a second buy-out agreement. The arbitrator awarded arbitration costs/fees, but ordered
Mail Service Extension Rules Did Not Apply in MFAA Context. The next case goes to show you how (1) the facts are usually outcome determinative, and (2) the specific context and promulgated rules in a statutory scheme may well prevail over a result that seems intuitive under a different set of rules.
Second District, Division Two Finds Arbitrator Did Not Exceed His Power In Awarding Substantial Fee Award In Favor of Law Firm and Against Former Client. Former Client in 1999 signed a fee retainer agreement, both individually and on behalf of two affiliates, in which arbitration was the dispute resolution remedy. The
Second District, Division Eight So Holds In Unpublished Decision Showing the Deference Given to Arbitral Decisions. Any practitioner dealing with binding contractual arbitration will have read, many times we believe, the California Supreme Court’s decision in Moncharsh v. Heily & Blase, 3 Cal.4th 1 (1992). Moncharsh gave broad deference to arbitration
Defendants in Real Estate Concealment Case Win at Arbitration and Get Partial Recoupment of Attorneys Fees. At a month trial in Orange County Superior Court, two individual clients of Mike Hensley suffered an adverse jury award of about $285,000. The clients sold their prior San Juan Capistrano house to plaintiff buyers,
Fifth District Unpublished Decision Finds that Supreme Court Authority Allows Arbitrator to be the Arbiter of “Prevailing Party” Status for Fee Recovery Purposes. In Thompson Pacific Construction, Inc. v. Swinerton Builders, Inc., Case No. F053237 (5th Dist. May 20, 2008) (unpublished), the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed an arbitrator’s power
