Cases: Prevailing Party

Arbitration/Fee Clause Interpretation/Prevailing Party: Dismissed Arbitration Still Meant Litigant Prevailed, Santisas Notwithstanding

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Party Getting Dismissed Arbitration Proceeding Entitled to Fees.      Lakeside Club Villas, Inc. v. LB Property Mgt., Inc., Case No. B236001 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Oct. 16, 2012) (unpublished) is an interesting case showing how the breadth of a fees clause awarding fees/costs in an arbitration will garner a litigant a fee recovery, even […]

Prevailing Party/Special Fee Shifting Statute: Fee Denial To Attorney In Contempt Proceeding Reversed And Remanded To Determine Existence of Attorney-Client Relationship Giving Rise to Fee Recovery

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  First Aftermath of Published Rickley v. Goodfriend Decision      On July 30, 2012, we posted on Rickley v. Goodfriend, 207 Cal.App.4th 1528 (2012) (Rickley I), which reversed  a fee denial reversed, based on CCP § 1218 which does allow contempt proceeding fee-shifting in the right circumstances. The matter was remanded, however, to determine if

Prevailing Party: Second District, Division 1 Adopts Bright-Line Test That “Of Counsel” Attorney Successfully Representing Firm Not Entitled To Recoup Fees For Firm Under Trope Prohibition

Cases: Prevailing Party

  Close of Relationship Between Firm and “Of Counsel” Found Dispositive.      Presiding Justice Mallano, on behalf of a 3-0 panel of the Second District, Division 1, adopted a bright-line test in Sands & Associates v. Juknavorian, Case No. B232686 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 10, 2012) (published). The appellate court decided that a firm

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff Defeating Cross-Complaint Via Summary Judgment Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Award As Prevailing Party Even Though Its Complaint Against Defendant Not Resolved But Reclassified As Limited Civil Action

Cases: Prevailing Party

  $56,100 Fee Award Affirmed In Dispute Over $10,171.26 Receivable Based on Fees Clause in Parties’ Contract.      Food Safety Net Services v. Eco Safe Systems, USA, Inc., Case No. B231667 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 4, 2012) (published) goes to show you how even minor disputes can produce exponentially greater fee awards for the

Prevailing Party: Defendant In State Court Obtaining Dismissal Of Action Due to Exclusive Federal Court Jurisdiction Entitled To Civil Code Section 1717 Attorney’s Fees As Prevailing Party

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Second District Finds Profits Concepts and PNEC Better Reasoned Than Drummond; Federal Court Denial Of Fees Based On No Contract With Fees Clause Did Not Require Different Result.      Interesting procedural issues were at the forefront in Kandy Kiss of California, Inc. v. Tex-Ellent, Inc., Case No. B234541 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Sept. 21,

Deadlines/Fee Clause Interpretation/Prevailing Party/Reasonableness Of Fees: Reciprocal Easements Agreement With Broad Fees Clause Justifies Fully Requested Fee Award Of $82,145.50

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Timeliness, Nonsignatory, Prevailing Party, and Reasonableness Arguments All Rejected on Appeal.      Jones v. Ju, Case No. E053266 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 7, 2012) (unpublished) involved a real property successor owner who knew about a reciprocal easements agreement but forced one of the adjoining owners to get a declaratory relief judgment on its

Allocation/Special Fee Shifting Statute/Taxation: Prevailing Real Property Taxpayer Properly Awarded $70,806.71 Under Revenue And Taxation Code Section 1611.6

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Taxation

  Government Code Section 800 Cap Does Not Apply to Section 1611.6 Awards.      Acting Presiding Justice Moore, in a 3-0 decision in Villa San Clemente LLC v. County of Orange, Case No. G04984 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 4, 2012) (unpublished), dealt with a $70,806.71 attorney’s fees award under Revenue and Taxation Code section

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff Defeating A Motion To Compel Arbitration Not Entitled To Fee Recovery Until Underlying Contract Case Resolved

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Compel Arbitration and U.S. Supreme Court Cert Petition Fees Reversed, Based on Frog Creek Partners.      It will not come as a surprise that Frog Creek Partners, LLC v. Vance Brown, Inc., 206 Cal.App.4th 515 (1st Dist., Div. 5 2012) will make our Top 20 List at the end of the year. Several appellate

Celebrities/Prevailing Party/Special Fee Shifting Statute: Plaintiff’s Dismissal Of Complaint Without Prejudice Due to Defense Standing Challenge Triggers Fee Exposure Under Cal Right To Publicity Statute

Cases: Celebrities, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  “Reverse” Unity of Interest Argument Did Not Dictate Different Result.      Civil Code section 3344.1, California’s right to publicity statute, does contain a mandatory fee-shifting clause in favor of the prevailing party, with attorney’s fees and costs being the carrot for such a party. The next case involves an interesting procedural situation in a

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Defendants Winning Loan Litigation Based On Statute Of Limitations Entitled To Fee Recovery As Prevailing Parties

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  $25,675 Was Awarded in Favor of Winning Defendants.       Plaintiffs, suing on a loan agreement with a fees clause, lost on statute of limitations (time bar) grounds to defendants in Hale v. Adams, Case No. B234826 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 14, 2012) (unpublished). Defendants then moved for and recovered $25,675 in attorney’s fees

Scroll to Top