However, On Remand, Court Had To Decide Who Prevailed On A Practical Level Anyway. Wentworth v. Regents of the University of California, Case Nos. A168296/A168861 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Sept. 30, 2024) (published) shows how reversal of a claim bearing fee exposure will result in a reversal of a fee denial, as a general […]
Both Sides Appealed, But Their Challenges Were Unsuccessful. Simers v. Los Angeles Times Communications LLC, Case No. B323715 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Aug. 30, 2024) (published) involved a long-standing dispute between plaintiff T.J. Simers, a controversial columnist, and defendant L.A. Times involving constructive termination, age discrimination, and disability discrimination claims under FEHA. Needless to
Plaintiffs’ Reasons To Not Reverse The Award Were Unpersuasive. Acting Presiding Justice Segal, author on behalf of the 2/7 DCA in Benton v. Telecom Network Specialists, Inc., Case No. B318867 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Aug. 19, 2024), confronted a very spirited opposition by plaintiffs/class winning substantial fees for why the reviewing court should not
The Defense Could Not Retract From Its Agreed-Upon Settlement Amount. In Loudon v. DHSE, Inc., Case No. E081497 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 8, 2024) (unpublished), defendants agreed to settle a PAGA action through a written settlement agreement providing plaintiffs were entitled to attorney’s fees of $226,000, or one-third of the PAGA settlement amount.
Employers Not Paying Fees Upfront Can Be Exposed To Further Arbitration Expenses Before the Axe Comes Down; Appellate Court Found No FAA Preemption, With This Preemption Issue Now Being Reviewed By The California Supreme Court. Although unpublished, Costa-Fleeson v. Americor Funding, Inc., Case No. G062962 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 1, 2024) (unpublished) is
Employee Won $4,000 For Employer’s Failure To Issue Accurate Itemized Wage Statements. In Sanzone v. DCH Korea Imports, LLC, Case No. G063483 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 3, 2024) (unpublished), an arbitrator awarded an employee $4,000 on a Labor Code failure to issue accurate itemized wage statements, after denying several other Labor Code claims,
$245,531 Was The Fee Award And $8,489.76 Was The Cost Award. In Doustkam v. Sage, Case No. B321390 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 2 July 1, 2024) (unpublished), plaintiff claimed $747,000 in unpaid commissions under the Labor Code, dismissing some claims and losing other claims because of a lack of evidentiary support. The trial
Reasonableness Of Fees Will Be An Issue On Remand. Justice Viramontes, in Gramajo v. Joe’s Pizza on Sunset, Inc., Case Nos. B322697 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 8 Mar. 25, 2024) (published), confronted a situation where an employee recovering $7,659.93 for minimum wage and overtime claims in a long jury trial then sought $296,920
Because The Fees Provision In The Parties’ Settlement Agreement Did Not Address Fees Incurred Post-Settlement, Plaintiffs Were Entitled To Recovery Under Section 1194, But Only As To Fees Incurred In Conducting Discovery And Litigating To Trial, Not In Enforcing The Settlement Agreement. In Lorta v. Bishop, Case No. G062166 (4th Dist., Div. 3
Prevailing FEHA Defendant Must Bring A Motion To Obtain Discretionary Costs Because Losing Plaintiff’s Case Must Be Shown To Be Objectively Frivolous In Nature. On January 15, 2024, we posted on Neeble-Diamond v. Hotel California by the Sea, LLC, Case No. G061425, which was issued on January 11, 2024 as an unpublished opinion. We
