Lower Court Did Not Err in Refusing to Award Costs, Says Fourth District, Division 3. In Helmy v. Assaf, Case No. G041883 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 4, 2010) (unpublished), plaintiffs achieved limited success in a declaratory relief action over the membership and control of the board of directors of a nonprofit named the […]
One-Side Legal Costs and Fees Provision Was Part of the Problem Most cases we report about involve an award of attorney's fees, or the denial of an award. But we cast our net widely. In the next case, an arbitration provision was held to be procedurally and substantively unconscionable, in part because it had a
Second District, Division 3 Distinguishes Other Costs Apportionment Decisions. In Fennessy v. DeLeuw-Cather Corp., 218 Cal.App.3d 1192 (1990), the appellate court held that when a prevailing party incurs costs jointly with other parties who remain in the litigation and seeks recovery of costs during the pendency of the litigation, that party may recover only
Liquidated Damages Clause Found Valid; Fees/Costs Award Sustained Also. This next decision should be of substantive interest to both developers and our readers interested in fee issues. Although unpublished, Beck Properties, Inc. v. Hameed, Case No. C058279 (Dec. 11, 2009) decided that an anti-speculation clause in a purchase agreement between a developer and
Fifth District, in Published Decision, Supports Broad Equitable Powers of Probate Courts. Probate contests are often donnybrooks between different beneficiaries or relatives. This next one was certainly that. However, the losing minority beneficiaries caused the trustee to expend lots of attorney’s fees, which were recouped when the probate court ruled they could be obtained
Second District, Division 4 Affirms Costs Award in Favor of Prevailing Party. In Marina Glencoe, L.P. v. Neue Sentimental Film A.G., Case No. B203163 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Dec. 2, 2009) (unpublished), prevailing party defendant in a dismissed contractual breach action obtained a routine costs award of $14,697.58, which was appealed by the losing
Fourth District, Division 1 So Rules in Unpublished Decision. In Jameson v. Desta, Case No. D053089 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 23, 2009) (certified for partial publication, but pertinent part for this post unpublished), the Fourth District, Division 1 held that paralegal fees are not recoverable as “costs on appeal” under California Rules of
Lower Court Erred In Awarding $5,218.60 in Filing Fees, Motion Fees, and Registered Process Server Charges. In Meyers v. Fitzgerald, Case No. H032605 (6th Dist. Nov. 19, 2009) (unpublished), plaintiffs filed a complaint that was ordered to arbitration. The complaint was later dismissed without prejudice based on certain voluntarily actions taken by defendants. However,
Second District, Division 7 Agrees with Sister Court that Costs Are Awardable if Reasonably Necessary to the Conduct of the Litigation Based on Analogous Out-of-County Counsel Cases. In Jessen v. Mentor Corp., Case No. B210059 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Nov. 17, 2009) (unpublished), the Second District, Division 7 agreed with the Fourth District,
Second District, Division 8 Affirms $250,000 Fee Award to Prevailing Defendants. A broadly-worded attorney’s fees provision—such as one allowing for fee recovery in “any action whatsoever arising from rights and obligations established under [the] Bylaws, including but not limited to actions for damages resulting from a breach of these Bylaws or actions for specific
