Award Of Attorney Fees Under Code Civ. Proc. § 527.6 Is Committed To The Discretion Of The Trial Court Regardless Of Prevailing Party Status In Myers v. Dorsaneo, Case No. A161586 (1st Dist., Div. 1 October 18, 2021) (unpublished), the 1/1 DCA affirmed the trial court’s denial of Code Civ. Proc. § 527.6 attorney […]
May Sound Quirky, But It Is The Law! In Bernstein v. Sebring, Case No. C088375 (3d Dist. Sept. 21, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiff/cross-defendant and defendant/cross-complainant partially settled some claims (where costs were waived) but proceeded to trial on some remaining claims. The trial judge ultimately dismissed plaintiff’s complaint, and defendant voluntarily dismissed his remaining cross-claim.
Awarded Fees, Which Were Reduced From The $70,000 Requested, Were Not Excessive Considering The Complexities Of The Case And The Increased Attorney’s Fees Plaintiff Incurred As A Result Of Defendant’s Conduct. In Rowan v. Kirkpatrick, Case No. A161436 (1st Dist., Div. 3 September 13, 2021) (unpublished), defendant appealed the trial court’s award, under Code
After All, The Trial Court Did Reduce The Request Substantially, And Lack OF Comparative Analysis/Specific Objections Did Not Meet The Burden In Opposing The Fee Application. In Avalanche Air, Inc. v. Dwelling Construction, Inc., Case No. B302340 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Aug. 24, 2021) (unpublished), subcontractor sued for nonpayment, and general contractor sued for
Overall Litigation Picture Must Be Surveyed. In Betuel v. Luma Pictures, Inc., Case No. B297030 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 19, 2021) (unpublished), parties under a settlement agreement reached a resolution on partial ownership in a corporation, with a contractual fees clause being present in the settlement document. However, one of the litigants who
$157,146.44 Was Fee Assessment Against Homeowners Arising Out Of Landscape Dispute. In a somewhat complimentary unpublished decision to Harris v. Rojas (a Second District decision we posted on recently), the Third District in Winchester Community Assn. v. Perrotta, Case No. C085295 (3d Dist. July 20, 2021) (unpublished) had to review a discretionary “prevailing party”
Case Has Interesting Observations On The Necessity To File A Related Case Notice, Present An Adequate Appellate Record, And Show Common Sense As Far As Claiming To Be A Prevailing Party. Justice Wiley has authored, on behalf of the 2/8 DCA, a colorful decision on who is a “prevailing party” for Civil Code section
Two Separate Contracts Were At Issue – With Plaintiff Prevailing On The Asset Purchase Agreement And Defendant Prevailing On The Employment Contract. In Colaco v. Cavotec SA, Case NO. G059418 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 24, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiffs corporation and its sole shareholder/CEO entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement and Plan of Reorganization
Plaintiffs Dismissed Their Action Only After Achieving Their Main Litigation Objective. In Champir v. Fairbanks Ranch Assn., Case No. D077384 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 22, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiffs sued homeowners’ association for breach of the CCR’s stemming from association’s decision to install traffic lights at a location not approved by a majority of
Minor Reversal And Remand Did Not Disturb Prior Fee Result. We have to say that we love the language of Justice Bedsworth from our local 4/3 DCA, especially in this case which has gone up and down in the trial and appellate courts, namely, Voit v. Malliet, Case Nos. G058435 et al. (4th Dist.,
