Despite County’s Breach of Completion Date, Continued Negotiations Waived Any Breach and Mixed Results Sustained Fee Denial. Unless you have a clear win under a contractual fees clause, a trial judge has discretion to determine who the prevailing party is under Civil Code section 1717. We have blogged on many cases that underscore this […]
Second District, Division 4 So Holds in Family Law Judgment Enforcement Case. Although deciding that a debt owed under an expired note and unenforceable trust deed still survives for enforcement under Family Code section 291, the litigants in each side of this case actually got both good news and bad news. Plaintiff succeeded in
Fee Denial Affirmed by Fourth District, Division 2. Cannan Construction v. Majewski, Case No. E048784 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Dec. 16, 2010) (unpublished) demonstrates that the trial court has substantial discretion in determining who is a “prevailing party” under fee shifting statutes. In this one, plaintiff won quantum meruit recovery from defendant, but
Second District, Division 6 Finds No Unreasonableness in Trial Court Awards. “Scorched earth” is a frequently bandied phrase in litigation. However, if a trial court believes that you as a litigant have engaged in it, this strategy may cost you big when it comes time for reckoning fee/cost recovery to the prevailing party after
Fourth District, Division One Affirms Trial Court’s “Wash” Decision on Issues. The next case involves a melange of fee and costs issues arising from a contract and civil rights case in which plaintiff recovered nothing on her claims but beat school district’s contract cross-claim. That gave rise to all sort of prevailing party claims
Second District, Division Four Reversed Costs Denial, Affirmed Fees Denial. The next case shows that courts pragmatically gauge prevailing party status when in comes to fees and costs awards—costs may be mandatory upon a voluntary dismissal, but not necessarily an award of attorney’s fees in the same circumstance (with the fees award being the
Sonoma Risk Insurance Agency Offers New Products to Manage Litigation Risks. In our August 3, 2010 post, we discussed a recent article written by Kevin B. Martin in the August 2010 edition of The Orange County Lawyer. Mr. Martin is CEO of Sonoma Risk Insurance Agency, which offers contract litigation insurance underwritten by
After the Event or Legal Expense Insurance Is the Middle Ground Discussed. Kevin Martin, founder and CEO of Sonoma Risk Insurance Agency, has written an interesting article, aptly entitled “Leveling the Playing Field in Contract Disputes,” in the August 2010 edition of The Orange County Lawyer. In some statistics directly relevant to
Second District, Division 1 Affirms CCP § 1032 Fee Determination, But Reverses and Remands For Civil Code § 1717 Recovery Calculation. As we have discussed under our category “Prevailing Party,” the determination of prevailing party focuses on the results reached on each distinctive claim by each distinct litigant, with different statutes governing the distinct
Fourth District, Division 3 Emphatically Makes the Point. Roden v. Amerisourcebergen Corp., Case No. G041990 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 8, 2010) (certified for publication) involved a plaintiff who was disappointed in being denied an award of attorney’s fees under a supplemental executive retirement plan (with ERISA implications) after prevailing on some aspects of
