Cases: Class Actions

Fee-Splitting Agreement Not Disclosed To Court In Class Action Fairness Proceedings Precluded Later Suit To Enforce The Agreement

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Referral Agreements

California Rule of Court 3.769(b) Compels Heightened Disclosure and Scrutiny in Class Action Contexts.             In our July 28, 2008 post, we discussed Manley v. Burunsuzyan, an unpublished decision that reinforced the need for client consent to a fee-splitting arrangement between counsel pursuant to Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 2-200(A).  Aside from

ATTORNEYS IN LABOR VIOLATION CLASS ACTION ARE AWARDED 1.65 MULTIPLIER–$1,199,550—PLUS $60,611 FOR FEE PETITION EXPENSES IN WINNING A MILLION DOLLAR AWARD IN CITY OF HAYWARD LIVING WAGE ORDINANCE CASE

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

First District Affirms Trial Court Fee Award Reflecting the Risks of a Contingency Case.             Mr. Leviant, the CEO of The Complex Litigator blog, recently welcomed us to the blogosphere and asked if we would be commenting on class action fee awards.  “Yes,” is the answer, and this is our first specific

Scroll to Top