Higher Hourly Rate Awarded For Out-Of-County Attorney Affirmed Where Successful SLAPP Defendant Showed Good Faith Effort To Hire Local Counsel. We discussed Marshall v. Webster, Case No. C088240 (3d Dist. August 27, 2020) in our August 27, 2020 post – a partially published case, with the fee discussion unpublished. In Marshall, […]
Defense Showed Good Faith Efforts, Albeit Unsuccessful, To Hire Local Counsel, So Higher Hourly Rate Compensation Was In Order. So this case was venued in Siskiyou County, which is a northern California county abutting on the Oregon border near Mount Shasta and having a population of 44,000 – 45,000 depending on how you count
Limited Success/Allocation Fee Challenges Rejected On Appeal; Expert Witness Fees Can Be Sought Through A Costs Memorandum. In Abarca v. Citizens of Humanity, LLC, Case No. B290090 (2d Dist., Div. 3 June 18, 2020) (unpublished), a FEHA plaintiff won a jury verdict on disability discrimination/retaliation claims, although losing two other claims, to the tune
Reason Was That Both A Surrogacy Agreement Venue Provision And Factual Circumstances Showed The Matter Needed To Be Resolved In Transferee Venue. In Omega Family Global, Inc. v. Doe, Case No. D075358 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 17, 2020) (unpublished), defendants were granted a venue transfer motion from San Diego to Riverside where a
Borrowers Repeatedly Failed To Cite To The Record – Thus Forfeiting Their Arguments – But Awarded Fees Were Nonetheless Reasonable. In Polycomp Trust Co. v. Agbede, Case Nos. E070613 and E071376 (4th Dist., Div. 2 June 15, 2020) (unpublished), borrowers defaulted on their commercial property loan and their four lenders successfully filed an
$557,441.75 Was The Fee Request, But Owners’ Apportionment Not Credited Below Or On Appeal, So Reduced Award Was The Result. In Stolp v. Murphy-True, Inc., Case Nos. A154770/A155426 (1st Dist., Div. 1 June 4, 2020) (unpublished), a litigation snafu resulted over a $3 million-plus remodel job at plaintiffs’ home, with plaintiffs suing for water
Reason Was That Matter Should Have Been Brought As Limited Civil Case Rather Than An Unlimited One. Code of Civil Procedure section 1033 grants a trial court discretion to deny, in whole or in part, a plaintiff’s recovery of litigation costs, including attorney’s fees, where the plaintiff brought the action as an unlimited
Prevailing Plaintiff’s Request For Fees In A Straightforward Lemon Law Case Was Properly And Significantly Reduced For Overstaffing, Lack Of Efficiency, Excessive Hourly Rates, And Denial Of Lodestar Multiplier. We discussed the then unpublished case of Mikhaeilpoor v. BMW of North America, LLC, Case No. B293987 (2d Dist., Div. 1 April 1, 2020)
Fees Award Should Not Get Offset Against Damages, And Trial Judge Awarded Contingency Arrangement Percentage As Fees—Dispensing With The Need For Review Of Detailed Bills. Prevailing plaintiff in Pham v. Nguyen, Case No. H044958 (6th Dist. Apr. 15, 2020) (unpublished), on the heels of winning $455,000 in damages, moved for contractual attorney’s fees. The
However, Prevailing Party Properly Awarded Apportioned Fees Of $49,875 Rather Than Requested $318,214 In Fees Against Defendant Landlord; Prevailing Defendant Property Manager Improperly Granted Routine Costs Because Motion Did Not Mention That Defendant And Nothing Showed The Costs Were Incurred. In Goins v. Williams, Case Nos. A152828/A153632 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 14, 2020)
