Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Chino Municipal Ordinance’s Fee Provision Supported Substantial Fee Award Against Verizon

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  $185,674.22 Fee Award and $12,829 Costs Award Sustained on Appeal.      Chino Municipal Code section 12.02.030 provides that any applicant (usually a telecommunications company obtaining an encroachment permit) failing to restore city or private property to the like or better condition after any encroachment damages “shall be liable for all costs to restore same […]

Private Attorney General Statute/Reasonableness Of Fees: 1985 California Attorney General Standards Provide Good Guidance Of Fee ReasonablenessUnder CCP § 1021.5

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Also Contains Good Guidelines in All Fee Proceedings.      We would like to thank reader James Wheaton, Esq., president of Environmental Law Foundation, for forwarding an August 23, 1985 memorandum circulated to all attorneys in the Office of the California Attorney General when that position was occupied by John K. Van de Kamp.     

Reasonableness Of Fees: Two Recent Incisive Legal Intelligence Studies Show Average Billing Rates For Small And Mid-Sized Firms And Internal Costs For In-House Counsel Departments

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Rates

     Incisive Legal Intelligence has two fairly recent surveys that may be of interest to those of you who follow our blog with respect to national attorney hourly rates and in-house counsel costs. Here you go. 2009 Billings Rates and Practice Survey for Small and Mid-Sized Firms.      In its 2009 study on billing rates

Sections 1717/998: Substantial Fee Awards To One Defendant And To Plaintiff As Against Other Defendants Sustained By Second District, Division One

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

Mutuality Principles and Invalidity of 998 Offer Buttressed Correctness of Trial Court’s Fee Awards.      Sargon Enterprises, Inc. v University of Southern California, Case Nos. B202789/B205034 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 9, 2011) (unpublished) was a hard fought case where plaintiff sued USC for breach of contract. Although lost profits evidence was found to have

Reasonableness Of Fees: $128,655 Fee Award Found To Be No Abuse of Discretion

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Standard of Review

Second District, Division 2 Sustains Substantial Award.      In Chapman v. Sullivan Motor Cars, LLC, Case Nos. B222542/B224885 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 9, 2011) (unpublished), plaintiff had a demurrer sustained without leave to his first amended complaint, with the lower court also adopting a referee’s decision to award attorney’s fees against plaintiff to the

Reasonableness Of Fees: Sixth District Affirms $374,913 Fee Award In Landlord-Tenant Dispute Netting $23,000 In Damages

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Lower Court’s Double Multiplier For Defense Litigation Tactics Sustained on Appeal.      Martin v. Taylor, Case No. H034649 (6th Dist. Feb. 8, 2011) (unpublished) goes to show you that there is no proportionality principle for awarding attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717. In fact, courts will often apply a multiplier if an opponent’s

Allocation/Reasonableness Of Fees/Special Fee Shifting Statutes/Lodestar/Multiplier/Costs/Standard Of Review: Lower Court Did Abuse Discretion In Awarding Certain Expenses As Fees, In Failing To Allocate, And In Applying A Multiplier

Cases: Costs, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Standard of Review

Abuse of Discretion Standard Did Not Prevent Reversal When Record Showed Errors, According to Sixth District.      In an interesting contrast to the way the abuse of discretion standard was deferentially applied in our contemporaneous post in Murrell v. Rolling Hills Community Association, the Sixth District found that the trial court abused its discretion in

Reasonableness Of Fees: Appellate Court Affirms $611,544.75 Fee Award Where Compensatory Damages Were Only $271,682

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717

No Proportionality Required Under Section 1717; Defense Expenditure Of More Proved Reasonableness.      In Big Ring Holdings, LLC v. Van Ness Mgt., LLC, Case No. A126692 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 26, 2011) (unpublished), plaintiff tenant was awarded $271,682 in damages for a leaking ceiling in a dispute over a yet-to-be-opened laundromat where there was

Retainer Agreements/Section 1717/Reasonableness of Fees: Client Winner Against Attorney After Voiding Retainer Agreement Was Entitled to 1717 Fee Recovery

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717

Sixth District Rejected 1717 Mutuality Challenge, But Did Remand For Determination of Reasonable Fee After Proof Failure.      Here is a very interesting one at the top of a new year in the retainer agreement/Civil Code section 1717/reasonableness of fees areas.      Palmer v. Taylor, Case No. H033644 (6th Dist. Jan. 4, 2011) (unpublished) was

Scroll to Top