Cases: POOF!

Arbitration: Homeowner Association’s Failure to Show it Requested Homeowner to Arbitrate Under CC&R Provision and that Homeowner Refused to Arbitrate Results in Denial of Petition to Arbitrate and Overturning of Fees Award.

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: POOF!

Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.2 Is Interpreted to Require a Party Seeking to Compel Arbitration to Plead and Prove a Prior Demand for Arbitration Under the Parties’ Arbitration Agreement and a Refusal to Arbitrate Thereunder. In the next case, Homeowner Association successfully petitioned to arbitrate a dispute with a homeowner, only to have the […]

SLAPP: Reversal Of Denial Of SLAPP Motions Means Plaintiff’s Fee Award Goes POOF! Too

Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

First District, Division 3 Reverses Fee Award.      As we have seen in cases reviewed in our category “SLAPP,” prevailing defendants on SLAPP motions are entitled to mandatory reasonable attorney’s fees. However, plaintiffs can get them if the court finds that the defendant’s SLAPP motion was frivolous or intended for dilatory purposes. Code Civ. Proc.,

Fee Clause Interpretation, 998 Offers, And Routine Costs: A Three-Fer In One Case—And A Resultant POOF! Upon Reversal Of The Fee Award

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: POOF!, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 998

Substantial Fee Award Reversed Because Fees Provision Did Not Reach Noncontract Recovery, While Rest of Trial Court’s Fee/Costs Orders Affirmed on Appeal.      In Gaggero v. First Federal Bank of California, Case No. B207273 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 30, 2009) (unpublished), Borrower voluntarily dismissed with prejudice his equitable, statutory and breach of contract claims,

Family Law, Judgment Enforcement, And POOF!: Wild Set Of Facts Convinces Appellate Court To Reverse $307,145.22 Fee Recovery By Husband Against Wife’s Lead Attorneys

Cases: Family Law, Cases: POOF!

Fourth District, Division 3 Finds No Predicate Basis Under CCP Section 724.080 to Award Fees For Failing To Record a Judgment Satisfaction.      Here is a Thanksgiving gift to everyone in a wild family law dispute. We knew that this one would be good when it began this way: “Family law cases, as we said

Reverse POOF!: Losing Homeowners, After Modification On Appeal, Are Entitled To Pursue Recovery Of Court Costs As Prevailing Parties

Cases: Costs, Cases: POOF!, Cases: Unlicensed Contractors

  Fifth District Determines Unlicensed Contractors May Not Offset Reimbursement/Disgorgement Claims Under Unlicensed Contractors Law.      Here is a spin on our category POOF!, where a reversal usually means a fee/costs award goes away for the time being. This next case is a reverse POOF!, where a denial of a costs award was reversed and

Blog Update: Burlage Decision On Rehearing …

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: POOF!

No Different Result.      On our September 2, 2009 post, we reported on the Burlage decision, which reversed confirmation of a substantial arbitration decision (complete with the overturning of a large fee award). We can now report that, on October 20, 2009, the Second District, Division 6, issued an opinion on rehearing that came to

CCP 1021. 5 And Mootness: Appellate Court Determines Mootness Doctrine Does Not Preclude Review Of $78,897.95 Fee Award Against Clerk And Registrar, Reversing Fee Award Based On Merits Reversal

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Second District, Division 5 Also Reverses Fee Award Against Clerk, Even Though Only Registrar Appealed the Merits Judgment.      Here is an interesting one for our appellate followers. It primarily deals with a mootness issue and its interplay with the fee award in the case.      In Carson Citizens for Reform v. Kawagoe, Case

POOF!: Reversal Of $30 Million Interference Judgment Means Substantial Costs Awards Went POOF! Too

Cases: POOF!

Costs Reversed For Redetermination After Future Retrial Or After Appellate Remand in Indian Casino Development Case.      The Fourth District, Division One Court of Appeal recently reversed a $30 million interference judgment, based on an inconsistent jury verdict, in an Indian casino development drama that was played out in San Diego County Superior Court.     

Scroll to Top