Attorneys Did Not Present Any Evidence Of Hourly Rate Or Hours Worked; However, Costs Award Was Affirmed. Pacific Attorney Group v. Nejad, Case No. G064975 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 14, 2026) (unpublished) is a good reminder of the type of evidence that discharged attorneys must present to obtain a quantum meruit damages award for […]
Case Has A Very Scholarly Discussion Of Requirements For True Retainers. Boyadzhyan v. Geragos & Geragos, APC, Case No. B324420 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 26, 2024) (unpublished) is an interesting case and, for practitioners and ethics experts, has an excellent discussion on the differences between a true retainer, fixed fee, or retainer with
However, Clients Had To Reimburse Certain Hard Costs To Attorneys. Although we generally do not post on out-of-state cases, Vandenberg v. RQM, LLC, No. 10 L 003188, 2020 Ill. App. (1st) 190544 (Ill. App. June 26, 2020) is a sobering reminder of what contingency attorneys must do to obtain substantial fees where a settlement
Result Was Reversal As A Matter Of Law Of Jury Verdict Based On Contractual Breach And Quantum Meruit, Because Contract Was Unenforceable And QM Claim Was Time Barred. Reeve v. Meleyco, Case No. C085867 (3d Dist. Mar. 24, 2020) (published) is an ethics reminder to all practitioners to get an express written consent from
Arbitration Was Properly Ordered Because The Claims Between Client And The Two Law Firms Arose Out Of The Underlying Retainer And Arbitration Agreements Client Signed With The First Law Firm. Client retained a law firm to represent her in an ongoing dissolution action – signing a Retainer Agreement and a binding Arbitration Agreement. During
End Result Is Declaratory Relief Action Based On Attorney’s Lien Did Survive Based On Longer Four-Year SOL Relating To Written Contracts. In Younessi v. Munoz, Case No. B265750 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Jan. 25, 2017) (unpublished), prior discharged counsel, both the individual lead attorney and the law firm, in a contingency-based personal injury
Court Of Appeal Found Instructive The Reasoning In Mojtahedi Decision. In this next case we post on, predecessor, discharged counsel was found to have sued the wrong party—successor counsel, rather than properly suing client to establish the validity and amount of an attorney’s lien in a retainer agreement under a “reasonable value of
Fracasse, Not Cazares, Test Applied. When a contingency attorney is discharged, the general measure of recovery is quantum meruit–the reasonable value of attorney’s services rendered to the time of discharge. (Fracasse v. Brent, 6 Cal.3d 784, 790-792 (1972).) This rule is reinforced, yet again, in Mann v. Hernandez, Case No. B240546 (2d Dist.,
In Siciliano v. Singh, Case Nos. E052352/E053582 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 5, 2012) (unpublished), one attorney won quantum meruit fees based on a voided contingency fee agreement, with both client and attorney seeking recovery of attorney’s fees and costs (even though, ultimately, attorney did beat out–barely–a CCP § 998 offer once routine
However, Attorney Did Prevail in Lawsuit, So Costs Should Have Been Awarded. Attorney sued a former client in a dispute over attorney’s fees for services provided in an arbitration. Attorney, who replaced another attorney in an owner-contractor construction defect dispute, did win a $1,034,297, plus $40,125 attorney’s fees, award from an arbitrator, although
