Deals With Multiple Issues After Lower Court Awarded Only $19,176 Out Of Requested $231,000 In Fees. In our March 19, 2015 post, we discussed the unpublished decision of Save Our Uniquely Rural v. County of San Bernardino, Case No. E059521 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 18, 2015). We now can update: the decision […]
Limited Success, Excessive Hourly Rates, and Excessive Work Led To Reductions, Although Court Disagrees With One Aspect Of Gorman Decision. In Save Our Uniquely Rural Community Environment v. County of San Bernardino, Case No. E059524 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 18, 2015) (unpublished), a CEQA plaintiff, a non-profit opposing the development of an
Lack of Detailed Reasoning Did Not Translate Into Abuse of Discretion, With Lower Court Having Plenty of Ammunition To Lower Requested Fees. We know that the law in many fee-shifting areas says that awarded fees do not have to be proportional to the ultimate damages awarded, especially in civil rights or consumer areas.
However, Many of the Nonstatutory Costs Were Taxed. Although we do not often post about trial court decisions involving fees and costs, Caleb Marker of Ridout Lyon + Ottoson, LLP in Long Beach sent us copies of the fees and costs rulings in Weiss v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. BC141354 (L.A.
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
Reduction In Requested Hourly Rate and Denial of Multiplier Were No Abuses of Discretion. In Shank v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc., Case No. G049844 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 14, 2015) (unpublished), Plaintiff won a sexual harassment jury verdict against an employer and employer’s trainer, to the tune of $391,000 in compensatory damages
Fee Award in TD Bank Wage/Hour Class Action. In Keller v. TD Bank, N.A., Civ. Action No. 12-5045 (E.D.Pa. Nov. 4, 2014 Order), U.S. District Judge L. Felipe Restrepo awarded class action counsel exactly what they wanted–$1.2 million in fees out of a $6 million settlement fund in the settlement of a wage/hour
Although Different Judge than “Merits” Judge Heard Fee Motion, Appellate Court Questions Whether More Scrutiny Is Required, But Affirms Even Under A More Rigorous Standard. Coalition for Adequate Review v. City and County of San Francisco, Case Nos. A135660/A138856 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Nov. 19, 2014) (unpublished) is an interesting case primarily involving
$8 Million Percentage of Recovery Request Nixed; Reductions Made for Inefficient Work Efforts and High Settlement/Mediation Work Requests. In Rose v. Bank of America Corp., Case Nos. 5:11-CV-02390 & 5:12-CV-04009-EJD (N.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2014) (Doc. No. 180), U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila gave final approval to a settlement of a class
However, Lodestar Had to Be Re-fixed on a Couple of Issues. Plaintiff SONG, a non-profit, prevailed in an earlier appeal of a challenge to the environmental review of a project to amend Lancaster’s general plan to change the zoning designation so that a developer could construct a shopping center on a vacant lot
