Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees

Attorney Lien/Retainer Agreements: Successor Counsel Not Knowing Of Prior Counsel’s Attorney Lien Did Not Have To Modify Retainer Agreement In Order To Comply With Business And Professions Code Section 6147

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  Also, Prior Counsel Entitled to Receive $25,000 Holdback Based on His Attorney’s Lien.      Henry Shain Professional Corp. v. Bergeron, Case No. A131328 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Mar. 20, 2012) (unpublished) is an interesting case illustrating how two attorneys–prior and successor counsels–did things right as far as perfecting attorney’s liens or drafting retainer agreement […]

Retainer Agreements/In The News . . . . New York Voids Retainer Agreement Terms Discouraging Clients From Following An Exiting Attorney

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements, In The News

  Attorney Lien “Penalty” Provision Also Invalidated.      As reported by both the American Bar Association Journal and Buffalo News in January 10, 2012 posts, New York Supreme Court Justice John A. Michalek voided two provisions in a retainer agreement apparently designed to encourage clients from following an exiting attorney to another legal firm. The

Liens For Attorneys Fees: Client Cannot Disrupt Attorney’s Lien By Settling Out From Under Lien With Adverse Party When Fee Award Was Final In Nature

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees

  Didn’t Help that Settling Client Got $100,000 in Cash in a Black Briefcase–None of Which Went to Attorney.      As co-contributor Mike is prone to say, “You can’t make this stuff up.” (Or something quite close to it.) Well, here is one with interesting facts and a result that is not all that surprising.

Family Law: Family Law Attorney’s Real Property Lien (FLARPL) Discussed In Recent Unpublished Decision

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees

  Family Code Section 2033 FLARPL Considered.      Although there was a reversal because an order rendered without an indispensable party is void (with the appellant being an indispensable party able to challenge the void order), the appellate court in Marriage of Ramirez, Case No. D058284 (4th Dist., Div. 1 July 19, 2011) (unpublished) discussed

Year End Wrap-Up: Mike & Marc’s Top 20 Attorney’s Decision Fees Decisions–Part 2 of 2.

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Costs, Cases: Experts, Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

     Here is the second installment of our top 20 decisions.      10. Jankey v. Lee, 181 Cal.App.4th 1173 (1st Dist., Div. 4 2010), review granted, No. S180890 (May 12, 2010) — authored by Presiding Justice Ruvolo; discussed in our Feb. 6, 2010 post.      Attorney’s fees are awardable to a prevailing defendant under Civil

Attorney’s Liens In Minor Compromise Cases And Attorney Withdrawal: First District, Division 1 Tackles Some Interesting Issues

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Minors

Finds Attorney’s Lien Dispute Can Be Resolved in Minor Compromise Case and Analyzes Permissive Withdrawal Circumstances That Will or Will Not Give Rise to Quantum Meruit Recovery.      Here is an unpublished decision that faced some gnarly issues regarding jurisdictional and quantum meruit recovery issues in an attorney’s lien situation where an attorney obtained a

Scroll to Top