Fee Recovery Carved Out Under Labor Code Section 1194. Justice Fybel, as the 3-0 panel author in Arreola v. One More Productions, Case No. G047467 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 5, 2014) (unpublished), affirmed denial of an attorney’s fees request of $27,265 to the defense under Labor Code former section 218.5. Once […]
Rental Inhabitability Battles Are Contractual, Giving Rise to 1717 Fee Exposure, While Limited Success On Minimum Wage Mandatory Fee-Shifting Claims Requires Apportionment and Possible Reduction. This next case is hard to pigeonhole, because it involves cross-over issues in the Landlord/Tenant and Employment post sites. However, Staley v. Carlson, Case No. A133115 (1st Dist.,
Judgment Roll Limited Appeal; Trial Court Found Apportionment Not Needed, And Defendant Did Not Identify Fee Entitlement Basis for Winning $10 Business Defamation Award. This next case, in our view, can well encapsulate many results we have seen over the years on fee disputes. One party wins a small damages award under a
Interrelatedness of Contract/Wage Nonpayment Administrative Proceedings and Trade Secret Bad Faith Justified Sustaining of Lower Court Awards. Plaintiff lost both DLSE administrative proceedings and a breach of contract/trade secret case against various defendants, with the lower court then awarding one defendant Labor Code section 98.2 fees of $43,881.25 for winning the DLSE appeal/beating
Employee’s Indemnity Request Under Labor Code Section 2802 Only Garnered Employee $1,908 In Fees/Costs Out Of Requested $807,421.22 In Defense Fees/Costs. Labor Code section 2802 provides that an employer shall indemnify his or her employee for all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his
Trial Court Decision Affirmed on Appeal. Plaintiff, a chief technology officer, sued his ex-employer and a couple of other employees, losing contract and conversion claims but winning about $20,000 on an unpaid wage/hour claim. Both sides then moved for attorney's fees. The trial court awarded the defendants $167,104.87 in fees on the contract
Lower Court Fee Denial Reversed on Appeal. Relying on Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc., 53 Cal.4th 1244, 1251 (2012) and Aleman v. Air Touch Cellular, 209 Cal.App.4th 556, 580 (2012), the appellate panel in Ayala v. Aldersgate Investment, LLC, Case No. B244513 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Mar. 21, 2013) (unpublished) reversed a
Employers Sought Over $2.2 Million in Costs And Fees, Previously Denied But Get a Second Chance Against Losing Employees. Zalewa v. Tempo Research Corp., Case No. B238142 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 1, 2013) (unpublished) is a wild “reversal of fortune” case on appeal. This was a remand from a previous appeal
Bolgar v. Glen Donald Apartments, Inc., Case No. B241636 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 26, 2013) (Unpublished). Although challenging a $71,934.65 fee award as an abuse of discretion, appellant did not go very far based on an inadequate record. None of the fee motion papers were included on appeal, so that the appellate
District Judge Rejected $1.7 Million In Fee and Costs Requested by Plaintiff’s Attorneys. District Judge Michael Telesca, in Mendez v. The Radec Corporation, Case No. 03-cv-6342 (W.D.N.Y.), recently nixed plaintiffs’ attorneys’ request for a $1.7 million fees/costs award in a Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) class action. The class obtained a settlement recovery
