Lower Court Properly Denied Plaintiff’s Fee Request. If you lose all of your claims (even in the civil rights area), you likely are not the prevailing party. The appealing plaintiff found that out in Arevalo v. City of Long Beach, Case No. B250345 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Dec. 10, 2014) (unpublished). There, […]
Appellate Court Agrees With Trial Court Analysis, Which Departed From Contrary S.D. Cal. Federal Decision. Plaintiff search engine optimization firm sued defendant marketing firm for breach of contract, prompting defendant to countersue plaintiff (as a cross-defendant) for breach of contract and for a violation of Penal Code section 502 (a computer hacking claim
However, “Prevailing” Landlord Did Not Garner 998 Postoffer Expert Fees or Get More Fees, In Case Implicitly Founded “Over Litigated” By Lower Court—With Landlord Trying To Get $365,000-$387,000 In Fees. If you have followed us over the years (we thank you for those that have, hoping we have provided some insights, or welcome
Sears v. Baccaglio Decision Found Not Viable CCP § 1032 “Prevailing Party” Law. This one is an interesting one under section 1717/CCP § 1032 routine costs jurisprudence. Here, client at first suffered a default judgment of $86,676.88 in favor of former attorney, but client obtained relief from the default judgment from the
City Obtained Permanent Injunction Against U-Haul Rental Operations at Particular Site, So It Won! U-Haul Co. of California v. City of Berkeley, Case No. A136973 et al. (1st Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 7, 2014) (unpublished) is a case where the City of Berkeley decided to revoke U-Haul’s permit to operate a rental facility,
$308,383.72 Fee Recovery Affirmed On Appeal. In Ito v. Ito, Case No. A136513 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 24, 2014) (unpublished), one party, in an LLC dissolution case, received $461,958 plus title to 3 properties, while second party received $20,092 plus title to one property in litigation with fee-shifting clauses in LLC operating
$425,000 Fee Request Plus 1.5 Multiplier Nixed on Appeal. In Holquin v. Dish Network LLC, Case No. D059983 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 22, 2014) (published), plaintiffs won a combined economic/noneconomic verdict against DISH Network and others in a satellite T.V. dispute. However, the rub was an attorney’s fees clause in the Residential
Successful Party in Arbitration, Suffering Setback on Appeal, Was Not a Prevailing Party. In Guerra v. Aurora Loan Services, LLC, Case No. H038813 (6th Dist. Sept. 19, 2014) (unpublished), a lower court denied a successful arbitration litigant his fees in connection with an equally successful petition to confirm the arbitration award. The trial
Goodman v. Lozano Paved the Way on This One. In Farkas v. 4528 Colbath LLC, Case No. B250440 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 9, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiffs in a retrial did “net” about $60,000 on a negligence claim (inclusive of one particular plaintiff winning damages on a wrongful eviction claim). However, in an
Where Reasonableness of Fees Involved, RT Is a Likely Necessity; Cost Memo Was Timely Filed. Pladott v. Blankstein, Case No. B250097 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 4, 2014) (unpublished) involved a plaintiff “hit” with attorney’s fees and costs by defense, with plaintiff arguing that the existence of a cross-complaint meant the postjudgment orders
