Cases: Choice of Law

Choice of Law, Prevailing Party: Where Plaintiffs Dismissed Contractual Claims, A Defendant Was Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees In The Suit, Excluding Prior SLAPP Fee Recovery, Because Defendant Forfeited The Claim That New York Law Applied By Using California Law At Important Junctures Of The Litigation

Cases: Choice of Law, Cases: Prevailing Party

Defendant’s Fee Request Was For Around $3.215 Million. Although this litigation was fierce, with defense parties winning SLAPP fees and contractual fees under California law, one defendant who never raised a conflict of law issue in previous crucial junctures was not allowed a substantial attorney’s fees recovery because it never argued clearly before the fee […]

Choice Of Law: $81,705 Fee Award Based On Settlement Agreement With Hawaii Choice Of Law Reversed On Appeal As A Matter Of Law

Cases: Choice of Law

The Defense Relied On California Procedural And Substantive Law At The Trial Court Level, Such That Invoking Hawaii Law Was Unfair Given The Settlement Agreement Had No Fee Clause.             McLaughlin v. Machen, Case No. H045869 (6th Dist. May 28, 2021) (unpublished) was an interesting choice of law case where plaintiffs lost certain claims against

Choice Of Law: Federal Courts Do Not Automatically Enforce Foreign Choice Of Law Clauses With Respect To Fee Recovery

Cases: Choice of Law

It All Depends On Whether The Issue Is Substantive Or Procedural.             So, you have a commercial transaction in which an agreement has a choice-of-law clause indicating that attorney’s fees will be awarded under the English rule (by which the losing party has to pay reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party).  Does this automatically

Choice of Law, Estoppel, Intellectual Property: Attorney’s Fees Properly Denied In Entirety To Plaintiff Winning Only 7.89% Of Total Damages, After Apportionment, In Copyright Infringement Suit

Cases: Choice of Law, Cases: Estoppel, Cases: Intellectual Property

Fee Recovery Barred By Judicial Estoppel—Plaintiff Classified Claims In Tort, Not Contract, Such That No Fee Recovery Allowable Under Either California Or Texas Laws.             This next case does demonstrate the complexity that our state appellate courts have to wade through, even in unpublished opinions, to adjudicate appeals from fee awards where conflicting state laws

Choice Of Law: Prevailing Texas Defendant Sued In California For Dispute Centered In Texas Did Not Meet Its Burden To Show Civil Code Section 1717 Fee Denial Was Incorrect

Cases: Choice of Law

Defendant Did Not Satisfy Nedlloyd Interest Analysis To Swing The Scales Back To California.             This next case may have limited utility because its result really hinged on defendant’s failure to meet its burden of proof under the appropriate choice-of-law analysis.             In River Oaks Self-Storage TIC 4, LP v. River Oaks Storage, LLC, Case

Choice Of Law: Plaintiffs Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Under Delaware Corporate Benefit Doctrine Where Causal Link Between Plaintiffs’ Activities And Corporate Benefit Was Rebutted And Shown To Be Nonexistent

Cases: Choice of Law

  Causal Link Was Missing Based On The Record.      Plaintiffs in a putative class action involving the proposed mergers between two advertising billboard companies, Outdoor and InterMedia, moved to recover attorney’s fees when another company (KSE) bought Outdoor for an enhanced purchase price, claiming to have benefitted Outdoor shareholders by an additional $57 million

Choice of Law/Section 1717: Ninth Circuit, In Diversity Case, Affirms Fee Award Under Bank Loan Documents Even Though Georgia Choice-Of-Law Clause Involved

Cases: Choice of Law, Cases: Section 1717

  California Choice of Law Principles Governed, With Ninth Circuit Believing California Supreme Court Would Decide 1717 Evinces Fundamental State Policy.     In one of our early posts on June 11, 2008, we talked about Civil Code section 1717—which makes unilateral contractual fees clauses reciprocal in nature—and its interplay with choice of law decision—decisions considering

Choice of Law: Ninth Circuit Faces Some Interesting Choice Of Law Questions Where Venued Diversit Action Has “English Rule” Loser Pays, But Another State’s Law Governs The Dispute Contractually

Cases: Choice of Law

  Hold On For The Answers.      Alaska Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Avis Budget Group, Inc., Nos. 10-35137 et al. (9th Cirl Mar. 6, 2013) (published) faced some interesting issues in a situation where a venued diversity action had a “loser pay” statutory fee recovery provision under Alaska law–the venue–but the contract between the parties specified

Scroll to Top