Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Judgment Enforcement: Judgment Creditor Could Not Gain Fee Recovery Against Subsequent Fraudulent Transferee Who Was A Party to Original Judgment

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Judgment Creditor’s Use of Clerk Default Fee Schedule Did Not Give Basis to Deny Fee Award, But Other Bases Did.      Under our category “Judgment Enforcement,” we previously have discussed the operation of Code of Civil Procedure section 685.040, which provides that attorney’s fees incurred in enforcing a judgment are recoverable as an element of […]

Enforcement of Costs/Fee Awards: Trial Court Still Has Discretion To Order An Undertaking For Postjudgment Costs/Fee Order Even Where Defendants Paid Off Prior Damages Judgment

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Judgment Enforcement

First District, Division 1 Grants Writ of Mandate Because Trial Court Failed to Exercise Any Discretion on Undertaking for Substantial Cost/Fees Order.      This post is somewhat complimentary to our June 12, 2009 post on Tracy v. Tracy, where a reversal and remand was required because a trial court failed to actually exercise its discretion

Post-Judgment Enforcement Undertakings: No Attorney’s Fee Entitlement In Governing California Statute

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Second District, Division 6 Considers Scope of CCP Section 720.260.      Code of Civil Procedure section 720.260(c) allows a creditor with a competing claim to prevent release of funds to a secured party or lienholder claiming priority by posting an undertaking in favor of secured party/lienholder to “[i]ndemnify the secured party or lienholder against any

Post-Judgment Enforcement: Supplemental Costs Memorandum Seeking Fees Must Be Served Upon Judgment Debtor

Cases: Judgment Enforcement, Cases: POOF!

Second District, Division 1 Reverses Supplemental Fee Award Based Upon Lack of Notice.      Under Code of Civil Procedure section 685.040, a judgment creditor is entitled to the reasonable and necessary costs of enforcing a judgment. Recoverable costs include attorney’s fees incurred in enforcing a judgment, where the original judgment includes a fee award pursuant

Mixed Result In Decade Long Litigation: Substantial Attorney’s Fees Award Goes “Poof” When Plaintiff Should Have Been Given Leave To Amend, But Plaintiff Denied Post-Judgment Enforcement Fees

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Judgment Enforcement, Cases: POOF!

Second District, Division 7 Publishes Decision in Decade Long Battle Arising From Credit Impairment Allegations.      Although too long to recite in detail (43 pages in length), Sanai v. Saltz, Case Nos. B198217 & B202787 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Jan. 26, 2009) (certified for publication) chronicles a donnybrook between a former in pro per renter

Judgment Enforcement: Contractual Fees Clause Not Trumped By Bankruptcy

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Second District Remands For Fee Determination in Split Opinion.      Under our category “Judgment Enforcement,” we have discussed prior cases construing Code of Civil Procedure section 685.040, which allows a judgment creditor to recover reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees incurred in “enforcing” a judgment if the underlying judgment includes an award of fees to the

Enforcement Of Foreign Judgment Awarding Attorney’s Fees Against Plaintiff’s Attorney Upheld By Second District, Division Eight

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Substantial Judgment Awarding Fees Found to be Nonpenal in Nature and Nonrepugnant to State Policy.      This post examines an appeal raising challenges to substantial fee awards against a litigant’s attorney (a nonparty) by the Gibraltar Supreme Court, akin to a California superior court, under English law. After the Los Angeles County Superior Court entered

Judgment Creditor Fee Awards: You Must Have A Fee Award In the Underlying Judgment To Collect Further Fees Under CCP Section 685.404

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

First District, Division Five Implicitly Agrees With Second District’s Globalist Decision.      In our post of October 28, 2008, we reviewed the Fourth District, Division Three’s decision in Globalist Internet Technologies, Inc. v. Reda, 167 Cal.App.4th 1267 (2008), where the appellate court ruled that fees incurred in the defense of a related settlement enforcement proceedings

CCP Section 685.040: Fees Are Awardable In Separate Action Successfully Defended By Judgment Creditor To Avoid Reduction of Original Judgment By A Five-Sixths Margin

Cases: Judgment Enforcement, Cases: Standard of Review

Fourth District, Division Three Relies on Jaffe v. Pacelli In Reversing Denial of Fee Award to Judgment Creditor.      In our August 2, 2008 post, we reviewed the Second District’s decision in Jaffe v. Pacelli, 165 Cal.App.4th 927 (2008), which dealt with application of Code of Civil Procedure section 685.040. That provision specifies that when

Sixth District Decides That Judgment Creditor Is Entitled to Enforce Subsequent Attorney’s Fees/Cost Order Through A Writ of Execution Even Though Creditor Satisfied Underlying Judgment During Pendency Of Fees/Costs Motion

Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Any Other Result Would "Undermine the Intent" of the Judgment Enforcement Statutes.             In a case that most law professors would love (replete with convoluted facts), the Sixth District faced an appeal by a judgment creditor arising from a 2000 judgment in judgment creditor’s favor that included an attorney’s fees award of

Scroll to Top