Cases: Lodestar

Equity/Lodestar/Multiplier/Retainer Agreement: $7.8 Million Fee Recovery For Well Known L.A. Attorney’s Work In Divorce Cases Reversed

Cases: Equity, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  No Written Retainer Agreement, With Quantum Meruit Jury Verdict Overturned And Reduced To $1.8 Million Plus Some Other Deductions.      This is a doozy of a case involving well known Los Angeles attorney Hillel Chodos, who happened to not have had a written hourly or contingency retainer agreement with an ex-client, a wife involved […]

Class Action: $1 Million In Class Counsel Fees Affirmed By Majority Under Lodestar And Percentage Of Recovery Methods

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Lodestar

  Dissenting Judge Concerned About Claim Response Rates and Clear Sailing/Reverter Clauses.      Laguna v. Singh, Case No. 12-55479 (9th Cir. June 3, 2014) (published) was a case which shows the divergent views of federal jurists on class action settlements where the common fund value is not of a fully liquidated nature.      The majority

Lodestar/Laffey Matrix/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Syers Properties Opinion Now Certified For Publication

Cases: Laffey Matrix, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Reviewed in Our May 6, 2014 Post.      In our May 6, 2014 post, we reviewed Syers Properties v. Rankin, Case No. A137610 (1st Dist., Div. 2 May 5, 2014 issued unpublished), which held among other things that: (1) detailed categorical breakout of time spent can substantiate a fee petition in California state courts;

Lodestar/Multiplier/Reasonableness Of Fees: Second District, Division 4 Unpublished Decision Has Outstanding Discussion Of Lodestar/Multiplier Factors, Limited Success, And Opposing Counsel Fees In Sustaining Lower Court Fee Award In Overtime Employee Cas

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  $603,150 Out of Requested $1,512,794.50 Was the Award, With Defense Counsel Getting Paid $1,070,000 by Safeway.      Although unpublished, the Second District, Division 4 has done an outstanding job of analyzing a reasonableness of fee award where both sides (prevailing employee and defending former employers) appealed, with employee arguing the fee award was too

Civil Rights/Lodestar/Multiplier/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: 88% Court Ordered Reduction In Civil Rights Fee Request Reversed

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Remanded To Decide If Multiplier Appropriate Upon Reversal of State Claim Giving Rise To Positive Enhancement.      The Ninth Circuit in Chaudhry v. Interfaith Communities United For Justice and Peace, Case No. 11-55820 (9th Cir. May 19, 2014) (published) is an interesting decision involving federal civil rights/attendant state law (CA Civil Code section 52.1)

Lodestar/Laffey Matrix/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: $843,245.27 Civil Code Section 1717 Fee Request/Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Laffey Matrix, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Successful Defendants Substantiated Hours and Hourly Rate Very Well In This One.      Syers Properties III, Inc. v. Rankin, Case No. A137610 (1st Dist., Div. 2 May 5, 2014) (unpublished) is a case where a $843,245.27 defense fee award under Civil Code section 1717 was challenged on narrow grounds—with plaintiff disputing the reasonableness of

Lodestar/Probate/Section 1717/Substantiation Of Fees: Court Affirms Fee Award On Fiduciary Duty Claims As Arising On Contract, Denies Fee Request Against Trustee Whose Opposition Was Not Frivolous, And Remands Lodestar Calculation

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Probate, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Looks Like Decades Trust Disputes Are Drawing To An End.      Holt v. Denholm, Case Nos. G045496 and G046293 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 28, 2014) (unpublished)—both authored by Presiding Justice O’Leary–are two appeals involving cross-over probate and Civil Code section 1717 issues in a long-running battle between different sides of a family trust—pitting a

In The News . . . Two Federal Court Of Appeals Decisions Use Different Methods To Fix Attorney’s Fees In Class Actions

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, In The News

  Third Circuit Sustains Using Percentage of Recovery Method, “Cross Checked” By Lodestar Analysis, In Setting Class Action Counsel Fees.      In Dewey v. Volkswagen of America Inc., Case Nos. 13-1123/1124 (3d Cir. Feb. 12, 2014) (not published/not precedential), the Third Circuit Court of Appeals sustained a $9,207,248 attorney’s fees award to class action counsel

Consumer Statutes/Lodestar/Reasonableness Of Fees: Ford’s Oral Opposition To Lemon Law Fee Request Was Unsuccessful As Was Subsequent Appeal

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Ford Motor Hit With $50,574.19 Lemon Law Jury Verdict, And Then Hit Again With $342,540.25 In Fees As Well As Costs/Expenses On Top.      Many California consumer statutes, like the lemon laws, have mandatory fee-shifting statutes. Frequently, a winning plaintiff can obtain fee awards that are many times a multiplier of the underlying merits

Civil Rights/Costs/Lodestar: FEHA Winning Plaintiff Entitled To Almost $88,500 In Costs, But Trial Court Utilized Incorrect Lodestar Analysis On Reasonable Hourly Rate And Determining Hours Worked When Awarding $484,687.50 Out Of Requested $1,675,627.50

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs, Cases: Lodestar

  Matter Remanded for Re-fixing of Fees Award.      Plaintiff winning a California Family Rights Act, some FEHA, and two common law claims—obtaining a jury verdict of $287,400–moved to recover about $95,000 in routine costs and $1,675,627.50 in fees enhanced by a 2.0 positive multiplier for well over $3 million in requested fees. The trial

Scroll to Top