Cases: Costs

Family Law: Pendente Lite Fee Denial Reversed For Failure To Consider Family Code Section 2030/2032 Factors; Appellate Costs Reduction Reversed For Legal Error And For Allowing Satisfaction Through Installment Payments

Cases: Costs, Cases: Family Law

Fourth District, Division 3 Also Has Some Comments on Systemic Problems Plaguing Family Law Courts in Orange County.      The next case is not only interesting for the legal issues discussed, but equally poignant in the way its weaves in a discussion of problems plaguing family law dockets in Orange County (and likely other California […]

Undertaking For Costs: Trial Courts Must Use CRC 3.53(b) Factors In Exercising Discretion With Respect To Out-of-State Indigent Plaintiffs

Cases: Costs, Cases: POOF!, Cases: Undertaking

  Second District, Division 7 Provides Guidance On Discretionary Decision Making Under CCP Section 1030.      Code of Civil Procedure section 1030 vests trial courts with discretion to require out-of-state plaintiffs to post an undertaking to pay costs to prevailing defendants where there is a reasonable possibility of a decision favorable to the defense. The

Civil Code Section 1717: Appellate Court Sustains Trial Court’s Refusal To Award Fees When Plaintiff Voluntarily Dismissed Contract-Based Claims

Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 1717

  Local Santa Ana Appellate Court Follows Santisas.      Santisas v. Goodin, 17 Cal.4th 599 (1998) is one of our Leading Cases, where the California Supreme Court held that contractual fees are not available under Civil Code section 1717(b)(2) where a case has been voluntarily dismissed or dismissed pursuant to a settlement of the case

Arbitration: Appellate Fees Awardable Upon Prior Reversal Without Awaiting the Final Result

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Costs, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party

Second District Panel Splits 2-1 on Whether Contractual Clause Allowed for Fee Recovery From Post-Arbitration Judicial Proceeding Win Before the “Dispute” Was Finally Resolved.      The next case illustrates how even appellate jurists will come to different conclusions when construing a contractual fees clause where the matter is one for de novo review based on

Routine Costs: Prevailing Cross-Defendant Denied Costs Where Defendant/Cross-Complainant Obtained Relief Under Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant’s Complaint

Cases: Costs

Fourth District, Division 2 Affirms Trial Court’s Award of No Costs to Cross-Defendant.      Plaintiff Gonzales brought a complaint against defendant Falzone involving various investment/partnership disputes, with Falzone filing a cross-complaint against Gonzales. After a bench trial, Falzone obtained relief under Gonzales’ complaint but was granted no relief under his cross-complaint. The trial court also

Private Attorney General Statute: Northern California District Judge Awards CCP Section 1021.5 Fees Of $1,423,127 To Plaintiffs Recovering $153,150 Against Taser Manufacturer

Cases: Costs, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Judge Refuses to Apply a Multiplier and Denies Costs to Successful City in Same Lawsuit.      Robert C. Heston, Jr. died after Tasers were deployed against him by Salinas police officers, death resulting in the aftermath of cardiac arrest. His mother/father and estate executor sued Salinas, the individual police officers, and TASER International (the manufacturer

Dog Lovers Beware—If Have a Service Dog That You Need To Bring To Court, Make Sure It Sits Down and Does Not Bother Jurors—Or Hire The Dog Whisperer

Cases: Costs

  In Pro Per Disabled Plaintiff Has Case Dismissed and Suffers Adverse $422,487.04 Costs Award Against Him.      The next case, although involving convoluted and far from mundane facts, should be of interest to dog lovers, and to tooth and claw litigators. As far as our blog is concerned, it reminds all plaintiffs—especially in pro

Prevailing Individual Defendant In Employment Retaliation Case Awarded Substantial Routine Costs After Rejected 998 Offer Of $1.179 Million 998 Offer Found Reasonable In Nature

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 998

  Fourth District, Division 3 Affirms Costs Award in Favor of Winning Individual Defendant.      If you are a plaintiff suing for employment retaliation, do not think that the suit carries little risks. Routine, non-fee costs of a substantial nature can still be assessed against you. Also, you as the plaintiff need to seriously evaluate

Routine Costs: Amended Verification Allowed By Trial Court “Related Back” To Filing Of Initially Defective Costs Verification

Cases: Costs

  Third District Finds Defect Was Not Jurisdictional in Unpublished Decision.      California Rules of Court, rule 3.1700 contains provisions relating to deadlines and requirements for filing and serving costs memoranda by prevailing litigants. Some of the requirements are: (1) a verification about accuracy of costs must be based on the declarant’s knowledge; (2) the

Scroll to Top