The Trial Court’s Inconsistencies In Its Findings And A Lack of Substantial Evidence Means A New Trial Is Required To Re-Evaluate The Claims And Defenses. Miranda v. Alford, Case No. G054897 (consolidated with G055167) (4th Dist., Div. 3 March 8, 2019) (unpublished) is a case involving a man’s wife of eight years, and […]
No Segregation Between Properly And Erroneously Awarded Amounts Meant Plaintiffs Lost The Full Amounts Of Their Awards For Compensatory Damages Of $1,289,000, Punitive Damages Of $1,289,000, Attorney Fees Of $2,385,773.70 and Costs Of $56,417.72 In Bevis v. Terrace View Partners, LP, Case No. D071849, (4th Dist., Div. 1 February 28, 2019) (unpublished), sixty-nine current
Plaintiff’s Failure To Object To The Project Before The City Council Approved It Meant Plaintiff Lacked Standing To Challenge The City’s Project Approval In Court In Turn Down the Lights v. City of Monterey, Case Nos. H044656/H045556 (6th Dist., February 28, 2019) (unpublished), Plaintiff petitioned for a writ of mandate on City’s determination that
After Ten Years Of Litigation, Tenant Only Received A $56,000 Net Recovery—Not Exactly A Win When All Of The Attorney Efforts Are Considered! Christie v. Ridge, Case No. B259189 (2d Dist., Div. 6 February 6, 2019) (unpublished), although unpublished, is a nice reminder of how costly litigation is and how both litigants winning attorney’s
Lower Court Had No Power To Change Prior Judgment And Then Award Fees. The result in this case may sound harsh, but it appears to be legally sound. In Schermer v. Upland Cascade, L.P., Case No. D072997 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 11, 2019) (unpublished), a first superior court judge “struck” class allegations
Rather, A Non-Party’s Withdrawal Motivated The Project’s Demise, Not Plaintiff’s CEQA Action. We many times have posted on the fact that there are very distinct elements to be satisfied under California’s private attorney general statute, CCP § 1021.5, including other requirements where a “catalyst theory” is being pursued. The next case, AG Land Trust
$249,861.50 Fee Award Goes Away For Now. In Colyear v. Rolling Hills Community Assn. of Rancho Palos Verdes, Case Nos. B278198/B279671 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Apr. 23, 2018) (unpublished), homeowner sued HOA for breach of fiduciary duty, slander of title, and quiet title arising from a tree trimming dispute between neighbors. (Boy, oh boy,
$53,637 Contractual Fees Award Went POOF! On Appeal. In Clark v. Delay, Case No. D072856 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 19, 2018) (unpublished), plaintiff filed suit over a partnership dissolution dispute mainly involving the claim that plaintiff did not get insurance proceeds under a buy-sell type of alleged oral arrangement. Among other documents, there
$1.282 Million Fee Award Went POOF! The Flareback. 1911. Library of Congress. Just to show you how the appellate court can giveth and taketh away (Job 1:21), in this case a taketh away, Hessler v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. B263088 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 27, 2016) (unpublished) is a
Terminating Sanctions Motion Was Not On The Merits, So Voluntarily Dismissal Was Timely For Fee Avoidance Purposes. Skating on ice. Irving Brokaw, c1908-1916. Library of Congress. Timing can be everything, as the next case demonstrates. In Liu v. Trask, Case No. B258112 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 15, 2016) (unpublished), plaintiff eventually
