Cases: Prevailing Party

POOF!/Prevailing Party: $1.8 Million Interest, Costs, and Fee Award Goes POOF! When Appellate Court Trims Compensatory Award From $1.1 Million To $117,050

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Prevailing Party Status Had To Be Redetermined After Reversal.     Hot Rods, LLC v. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Case No. G049953 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 7, 2015) (published) shows how appellate practice is not for the faint of heart.  The reviewing court will review the case for legal errors and will reverse based […]

POOF!/Prevailing Party: Winning Party In “Botched” Sale Of Advertising Sign Dispute Sees $369,284 Fee/Costs Award Go Away With Reversal Of Certain Tort Claims

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Prevailing Party

  $20,000 “Botched” Sale Resulted In Lots Of Damages And Fees, With A “Re-do” Based Upon Partial Reversals of Compensatory and Punitive Awards.      You gotta love how appellate courts can summarize disputes. Take Young Electric Sign Co. v. PC Dixon 1, LLC, Case No. C072212 (3d Dist. Oct. 28, 2015) (unpublished), modified Nov. 30,

Equities, Homeowner Association, Prevailing Party: Fee Recovery Against Two Voluntarily Dismissing Plaintiffs, Where Other Plaintiffs Still Fighting, Was Abuse Of Discretion Under The Circumstances

Cases: Equity, Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Prevailing Party

  $156,614.47 Fee Recovery Went POOF! On Appeal.     Wasserman v. Ketelhut, Case No. B258642 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Dec. 1, 2015) (unpublished) is an interesting common interest development case where multiple plaintiffs were fighting defendants over various CC&R governing document claims about defendants operating a vineyard which encroached on certain CID common areas.  (BLOG

Fee Clause Interpretation/Prevailing Party: Plaintiff Winning $25,522.38 Contractual/Noncontract Claim Dispute With Fees Clause Reaps $55,911 In Fees/Costs

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Failure to Provide Reporter’s Transcript Forfeited Challenge, But Fee Clause Was Broad Enough To Encompass Contract/Noncontract Claims.     Plaintiff agreed to install electrical distribution service to defendant’s winery facility, with plaintiff suing on both contract/noncontract claims for defendant’s alleged failure to pay.  Plaintiff sought $43,000 on his claims, while the defense argued only $18,000

Prevailing Party: Real Estate Sales Agent Losing Commission Dispute Was Subject To Fee Recovery Under Contract Clause

Cases: Prevailing Party

  Affirmance of Commission Merits Dispute Meant Fee Award Sustained Against Real Estate Agent.      In Aliev v. Courtney, Case No. D064239 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 24, 2015) (unpublished), plaintiff real estate purchaser challenged a commission paid to defendant salesperson, who eventually had to admit on appeal that neither he nor the brokerage company

Arbitration, Prevailing Party, Section 1717: Litigant Striking Fee Award From Arbitration Award, Although Losing On The Merits, Was Not Prevailing Party For Fee Recovery Purposes

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Striking Fees Was Not Discrete Proceeding Allowing For Recovery.      In Cooper v. Lavely & Singer, Case No. B261936 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 22, 2015) (unpublished), L&S won the merits of an arbitration case, but Cooper was successful in striking an arbitrator fee award in post-confirmation proceedings although the rest of the merits

Costs, Prevailing Party, Section 1717, Substantiation: $107,450 Fee And $22,318.45 Cost Awards In Favor Of Prevailing Plaintiff In Rescission Suit Affirmed

Cases: Costs, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Routine Costs Do Include Privately Retained Reporters Who Transcribe Court Hearings.      In Kim v. Park, Case No. A139056 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 23, 2015) (unpublished), plaintiff was awarded $107,450 in fees and $22,318.45 in costs after obtaining rescission of a purchase of a business, with the fees being awarded based on a

Prevailing Party: Fee Recovery Under “Dueling” Fee-Shifting Statutes Can Allow For Offsetting Analysis As Far As Ultimate Attorney’s Fees Award

Cases: Prevailing Party

  Net Fee Award To Plaintiff Was $3,709.19, Because She Won (Getting Fees) and Employer Won (Getting Fees).     Sharif v. Mehusa, Inc., Case No. B255578 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Oct. 14, 2015) (partially published) is an interesting decision which recognizes two things:  (1) fee recovery can be determined after offsetting “dueling” fee-shifting statutes; and

Construction/Prevailing Party: Prompt Payment Statutes Do Allow Trial Court With Discretion To Determine If Any Party Actually “Prevailed”

Cases: Construction, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Although Fees Are Mandatory, Prevailing Party Determination Is Threshold Call For Trial Judge Under Prompt Payment Statutes.      James L. Harris Printing & Decorating, Inc. v. West Bay Builders, Inc., Case No. C072169 (3d Dist. Aug. 27, 2015) (published) was dealing with fee-shifting provisions in some prompt payment statutes, specifically, Business and Professions Code

Allocation, Prevailing Party: Plaintiffs In Anti-Semitic Hotel Exclusion Case Get More Attorney’s Fees On Remand And For Appellate Win

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Prevailing Party

  This Is An Update For Our December 20, 2014 Post On An Unpublished Appellate Decision.     On December 30, 2014, we posted on Paletz v. Adaya, a Second District, Division 3 unpublished decision affirming most of a substantial attorney’s fees award of $2.1 million in favor of plaintiffs, except for a minor reallocation issue

Scroll to Top