Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Employment, Multiplier, Reasonableness Of Fees: Plaintiff’s Win On Some FEHA Claims Justified A $1,385,546 Fees/Costs Award

Cases: Employment, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Compensatory Award Was $709,555, With Counsel’s Skill And Multiplier Request Supporting The Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal.                The trial judge in Ramirez v. Bala, Case No. H049689 (6th Dist. June 30, 2025) (unpublished) awarded a FEHA plaintiff $1,385,546 in attorney’s fees and costs (about the full request, inclusive of a 1.5 multiplier) after plaintiff […]

Consumer Statutes, Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: Lower Court Awarding Fresno Rates To Attorney Litigating In Orange County And Slashing Fees/Cost Request By 82.9% Had Its Award Reversed And Remanded On Appeal

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Venue Rates Had To Be Used And The Substantial “Haircut” Needed More Explanation.                What happened in Tidrick v. FCA US LLC, Case No. G063186 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 26, 2025) (unpublished) is that lemon law plaintiffs requesting $82,719.33 in fees and costs ($74,275 in fees and $8,444.33 in costs) were only awarded a

Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: 2/5 DCA Publishes Blockbuster Opinion On Whether Federal Standard Of Heightened Scrutiny Of Fee Awards In Certain Cases Applies To California State Court Cases

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

In A 2-1 Opinion, Majority Holds The Federal Standards Are Inconsistent With The State Standard Giving The Trial Judge The Power To Adjudge Based On His/Her Experience.                We were wondering when an appellate court would take on a split in intermediate appellate thinking on whether across-the-board reductions for unreasonable padding, duplicative work, and unnecessary

Reasonableness Of Fees, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: $65,000 Fee Award Under Corporations Code Section 17704.10(g) Reversed And Remanded

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Trial Court Needed To Provide More Reasoning For Its Reduction In The Request.                Under Corporations Code section 17704.10(g), if a trial court “finds the failure of the limited liability company to comply with the requirements of this section is without justification, the court may award an amount sufficient to reimburse the person bringing the action for

Reasonableness Of Fees: 2/3 DCA Reverses An 82% Reduction In A FEHA Fee Request, Primarily Based On Reconstructed Time, As An Abuse Of Discretion And As Not Adequately Explained

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

“Haircut” Was Too Much, Requiring A Remand Revisit.                In the fee award area, the amount awarded is governed by an abuse of discretion standard.  However, large “haircuts” sometimes strike an appellate panel as too arbitrary, requiring a revisit.  That was the case in Guevara v. Interstate Meat Co., Inc., Case No. B332546 (2d Dist.,

Fee Clause Interpretation, Reasonableness Of Fees: Fee Clause Stating Recovery For Third-Party Costs For Collection Encompassed Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Trial Court Properly Reduced $124,160 Fee Request To $64,750 To Prevailing Party Based On Partial Success, Under A Percentage Of Recovery And A Lodestar Analysis.                Pulse Technology Consulting Group, Inc. v. Skowron & Bunning, LLP, Case No. C098036 (3d Dist. Feb. 11, 2025 partially published; fee discussion published) involved dueling actions about an information

Prevailing Party, Reasonableness Of Fees: $493,577.10 Attorney’s Fees Award In FEHA Case Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

2/8 DCA Considers Deferential Standards For Review Of Fee Awards, With The Record Establishing Plaintiff Prevailed And The Fee Amount Was Not Erroneous.                2025 greets us with a published fee decision written by Justice Wiley of the 2/8 DCA, in his recognizable writing style, with the opinion being penned in Pollock v. Kelso, Case

Costs, Prevailing Party, Reasonableness Of Fees: Most Of Costs Award Is Affirmed, As Well As Substantial $1,751,500 Fee Award Is Sustained On Appeal

Cases: Costs, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Certain Costs Not Awardable, With Lower Court’s Fee Reduction For Incivility And Abusive Litigation Found To Be No Abuse Of Discretion.                In Madison v. Theodore, Case Nos. B310551 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 7 Jan. 8, 2025) (unpublished), appellant lost a fiduciary duty-based case against plaintiffs to the tune of $3.9 million based on

Reasonableness Of Fees: Second Dist. Div. 8 Affirms $493K Fee Award And 1.8 Multiplier In FEHA Case

Cases: Employment, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Attorney Fees Are Rather Discretionary, And The Trial Judge Is Usually In The Best Position To Exercise That Discretion.         Pamela Pollock alleged her supervisor, Michael Kelso, sexually harassed her and discriminated against her based on race by denying her a promotion. The trial court initially ruled the lawsuit was time-barred, but the California Supreme

Allocation, Employment, Reasonableness Of Fees, Section 998: Costs-Shifting Under CCP § 998 Displaced By More Specific Labor Code Provisions Relating To Costs For Or Against A Prevailing Employee

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Employment, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 998

However, In Unpublished Part Of Decision, Appellate Court Affirmed A Small Fee Award Where Counsel Failed To Follow Lower Court’s Supplemental Briefing/Proof Instructions.                Chavez v. California Collision, LLC, Case No. A167658 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 10, 2024) (partially published; fee discussion unpublished) is part of a continuing trend for appellate courts to honor

Scroll to Top