Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation: $291,355.62 Fee Recovery Affirmed On Appeal Because Broadly Worded Fees Clause Encompassed Quiet Title Claim

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  No Apportionment Required Where Lower Court Could Conclude Efforts Intertwined With Covered Quiet Title Work.      In Hamilton Court, LLC v. East Olympic, L.P., Case No. B253511 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Mar. 12, 2015) (unpublished), defendants won $291,355.62 in attorney’s fees for trial and appellate work arising from a quiet title easement dispute. The […]

Fee Clause Interpretation: Tenants Prevailing On Two Tort Claims Did Not Present Fee Entitlement Basis Based On Agreement Which They Claimed Was Operative

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  The Other Agreement Might Have Provided Fee Entitlement, But Tenants Did Not Rely On That Agreement On Appeal, Choosing Unoperative Agreement Instead.      The lesson to be learned from Rodriguez v. The Condon Group LLC, Case No. G049245 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 27, 2015) (unpublished), a 3-0 decision authored by Presiding Justice O’Leary,

Fee Clause Interpretation: Broadly Worded Provision Allowed Fee Recovery To Home Park Tenant Prevailing In Landlord Premises Liability Case

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Landlord/Tenant

    Trial Court’s Denial of Fees Reversed.        Plaintiff was a tenant in a manufactured home park, falling while walking across a common area lawn. Plaintiff brought a premises liability suit against landlord, garnering a $311,899.67 damages award. However, the trial court denied plaintiff’s fee request.      That was reversed on appeal in

Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717: Prevailing Alter Ego Entitled To Fee Recovery Based On Fee Clause Allowing For Same In A Payment Dispute

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Reynolds Metal Drove the Reversal.      Cooley Constr., Inc. v. Matthews, Case No. G050422 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 24, 2015) (unpublished) was a situation where an alter ego defendant prevailed against a plaintiff in a construction payment dispute, which had two fees clauses—one specifying no fees for construction disputes and another allowing recovery

Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 998: Defendant Prevailing Under Fees Clause Entitled To Unapportioned Fee Recovery, Another Plaintiff Not Entitled To Fees Given Failure To Show Fees Clause Was Part Of Contract, And Defendant Properly Denied

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 998

  Olio Of Fees/Costs Issues Confronted By 4/1 DCA In Unpublished Decision. About olio: Is there that o’re his French ragout Or olio that wad staw a sow, Or fricassee wad mak her spew Wi’ perfect scunner, Looks down wi’ sneering, scornfu’ view On sic a dinner?      — Robert Burns      Cosco Fire Protection,

Family Law, Fee Clause Interpretation: Narrower Fees Clause Did Not Preempt Family Code Section 2030/271 Fee Award To Wife

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  Clause Much Narrower Than Preemptive Fees Clause in Guilardi Opinion.      Ex-wife in Marriage of Dryer, Case No. H038921 (6th Dist. Feb. 20, 2015) (unpublished) garnered Family Code section 2030/271 fees totaling $60,000 against ex-husband, who principally argued that a marital settlement agreement (MSA) fees clause was broad enough to “trump” fee recovery under

Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation, Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees, Section 998: Prevailing Attorneys In Collection Suit Against Ex-Client Sustain $1.532M Fee Award And $123K Expert Witness Fee Award On Appeal When Attorneys Recovered Base Collection

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 998

  Fees Clause Was Broadly Worded, Former Attorneys Represented Client In Seven Suits, and Section 998 Rejection Gave Rise to Expert Witness Fee Award.      This next opinion, Calvo Fisher & Jacob LLP v. Lujan, Case No. A139863 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 19, 2015) (published), is must reading for both litigants and attorneys involved

Fee Clause Interpretation, Judgment Enforcement: Fee Recovery In Counsel Disqualification Proceeding And Alter Ego Amendment Proceeding Properly Awarded

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Judgment Enforcement

  LLC Operating Agreement Clause Was Broad and Post-Judgment Activity Recovery Broadened Under 1992 Amendment.      In Fiscal Funding Co., Inc. v. Dones, Case No. A140460 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 13, 2015) (unpublished), Fiscal Funding brought a writ petition to unsuccessfully challenge an arbitrator’s decision to disqualify an attorney, who happened to be the

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Plaintiff Machine Buyer Properly Denied Fees Against Defendant Machine Manufacturer

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  No Fees Clause In Express Warranty Provisions, With Fees Clauses In Documents With A Different Lender Party.      Under Civil Code section 1717, you must have a contractual or third-party beneficiary/subrogation/successor relationship of some sort in order to press for fee recovery. These crucial relationships were missing in MGM Equipment Leasing Co., LLC v.

Fee Clause Interpretation, Settlement: Narrow Fee Clause Allowing For Recovery For Breach Of Settlement Agreement Did Not Justify Recovery Where No Finding Of Breach Made

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Settlement

  Broader Clause Might Have Resulted In Different Result.      This next case shows that care must be taken in crafting the scope of a fees clause, especially in a settlement agreement. The party successfully enforcing a settlement agreement was denied fees given that the fees clause was not broad enough to allow for the

Scroll to Top