Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Judgment Enforcement: Lower Court’s Denial Of Post-Judgment Attorney’s Fees Was Legally Incorrect Based On The Filing Of A Costs Memorandum Rather Than A Noticed Motion

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Because A Statutory Basis Allowed For Attorney’s Fees Recovery, Denial Based On A Lack Of A Contractual Basis For Fees Substantively Was Erroneous Where A Costs Memorandum Filing Allowed For Fee Recovery. In Immigrant Rights Defense Council, LLC v. Sklar, Case No. B345528 (2d Dist., Div. 5 July 9, 2026) (unpublished), somewhat of a follow-up […]

Interest, Judgment Enforcement: Interest On Routine Postjudgment Costs Runs From The Date Of The Original Monetary Judgment And Judgment Debtor Discovery Incorporates General CCP Discovery Abuse Provisions With Respect to Awarding Sanctions

Cases: Interest, Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Result Was That Interest Ran Much Sooner On Costs Than Judgment Debtor Wanted, And $9,087.50 In Sanctions For Boilerplate Objections To Judgment Debtor Discovery Requests Was Affirmed On Appeal Despite Paying Some Postjudgment Costs Earlier. Max v. Shih, Case No. B344402 (2d Dist., Div. 1 June 29, 2026) (unpublished) primarily related to a situation where

Judgment Enforcement: Unpublished Case Reminds Judgment Creditors That A Judgment Debtor Challenge To An Underlying Judgment On Appeal Does Not Give Rise to Enforcement Of Judgment Appellate Fee Recovery

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

2/2 DCA So Holds.                Bonin v. Chayes, Case No. B340106 (2d Dist., Div. 2 May 29, 2025) (unpublished) is a good reminder to judgment collection attorneys that appellate fees by a judgment creditor incurred to defend an underlying judgment are not collectible under the Enforcement of Judgments Act.  Here is the quote: “Plaintiff cannot

Judgment Enforcement: Enforcement Of Canadian Judgment In California State Courts Reminds Us That Attorney’s Fees Awarded In A Foreign Court Are Compensatory In Nature

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

They Are Not Penal, So Recognition Of The Award In California Is Proper.                Racicot v. Wiseau Studio, LLC, Case No. B334219 (2d Dist., Dif. 3 Apr. 30, 2025) (unpublished) is a situation where a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge domesticated a $1,089,010.16 Canadian judgment under the Uniform Foreign-County Money Judgments Recognition Act, Civ.

Judgment Enforcement, Section 998: 998 Rejecting Plaintiff’s Post-judgment Fee Request To Obtain Defense 998 Cost And Fees Was Righteous And Should Have Been Allowed

Cases: Judgment Enforcement, Cases: Section 998

Section 998 Governed Prejudgment Issues, But 998 Offer Costs And Fees Enforcement Activities Were Governed By Post-judgment Enforcement Statutes.                In Elmi v. Related Management Co., L.P., Case No. G062788 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 8, 2025) (unpublished), plaintiff rejected a defense CCP § 998 offer, with the case resolved for less than the amount

Judgment Enforcement: Judgment Creditor Entitled To Contempt Attorney’s Fees And Costs Against Person In Post-Judgment Enforcement Proceeding, Even Though That Person Was Not A Litigant In The Underlying Lawsuit

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

CCP § 1218 Was The Governing Statute Allowing For This Result.                 In Ofek Rachel, Ltd. v. Zion, Case No. B333959 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Nov. 21, 2024) (published), a person who was not a litigant in an underlying lawsuit was found guilty of contempt in post-judgment enforcement proceedings, ordered to pay the judgment creditor

Deadlines, Family Law, Judgment Enforcement: Attorney’s Fees Judgment Under Family Code Section 2030 Not Barred By Normal 10-Year Enforcement Period

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Family Law, Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Family Code Section 291(b) So Specifies.                   In Marriage of Shayan, Case No. B323455 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Oct. 25, 2024) (published), the appellate court affirmed a lower court’s conclusion that an attorney’s fees judgment under Family Code section 2030 was not governed by the normal 10-year enforcement period for most monetary

Fee Clause Interpretation, Judgment Enforcement, Section 1717: $70,635 Attorney’s Fees Award Favorable To Nonsignatory To A Contract, Reversed As A Matter Of Law

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Judgment Enforcement, Cases: Section 1717

Plaintiffs’ Claims Against Nonsignatory Did Not Seek To Enforce The Contract, With No Judgment Enforcement Fees Available To The Nonsignatory.                Crooymans v. Foumberg, Case No. B325110 (2d Dist., Div. 3 June 18, 2024) (unpublished) is a stark reminder that a nonsignatory to a contract, more often than not, does not face fee exposure under

Judgment Enforcement: Denial Of Judgment Collection Fee Request In 1st Action Reversed Because Judgment Creditor Did Not Have To Show He Was A “Prevailing Party” To Obtain Necessary/Reasonable Fees From Prosecuting A 2nd Fraudulent Transfer Action

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Also, The Appellate Court Rejected An Argument That Judgment Debtor Had Satisfied The Judgment When There Was A Pending Request For More Judgment Collection Fees Not Factored Into The Satisfaction Tender.                G.F. Galaxy Corp. v. Johnson, Case No. D081492 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 26, 2024 unpublished) [certified for publication on Mar. 8, 2024] involved

Scroll to Top