Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Reasonableness Of Fees: $254,615.50 Fee Award For Plaintiff Affirmed After Her Acceptance Of $95,000 CCP § 998 Offer

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 998, Cases: Standard of Review

$509,231 Scaled Back By Trial Court, But Sustained On Appeal.      Here is an interesting substantial fee award. Half of what plaintiff requested, but way above the $95,000 Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offer eventually accepted in the case on the eve of trial. Goes to show that fees do not have to be […]

Year End Wrap-Up: Mike & Marc’s Top 20 Attorney’s Decision Fees Decisions–Part 2 of 2.

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Costs, Cases: Experts, Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

     Here is the second installment of our top 20 decisions.      10. Jankey v. Lee, 181 Cal.App.4th 1173 (1st Dist., Div. 4 2010), review granted, No. S180890 (May 12, 2010) — authored by Presiding Justice Ruvolo; discussed in our Feb. 6, 2010 post.      Attorney’s fees are awardable to a prevailing defendant under Civil

Employment: $7,475 In Fees Awarded To Plaintiff Employee For Recovering $3,289.90 In Wage/Hour Dispute

Cases: Employment, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  Plaintiff’s Request for Over $58,500 In Fees Is Firmly Rejected.      Labor Code section 218.5 holds that a prevailing party in an action for nonpayment of wages, fringe benefits, or health/welfare/pension fund contributions must be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees. It was that pesky word “reasonable” that resulted in a much diminished fee award than

Consumer Statutes: Plaintiff Was Lucky To Get $20,400 In Lemon Law Fees After Rejecting Defense Settlement Offers

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Fourth District, Division One Reinforces that Consumer Statutes Are Not a Blank Attorney’s Fees Check.      This next one is a lemon law case, arising under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act with a mandatory fee-shifting provision. However, that fee-shifting statute only allows recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party (Civ. Code, § 1794(d);

Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Losing Plaintiff In Unsuccessful Overtime/Meal Break Superior Court Action Required To Pay Attorney’s Fees Of $28,731.25 To Employer

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First District, Division Two Finds Fee Motion Timely and Fee Award Reasonable in Amount.      In Cun v. Café Tiramisu, Case No. A124985 (1st Dist., Div. 2 July 7, 2010) (unpublished), plaintiff ex-employee lost a superior court FLSA action following a de novo Labor Commissioner hearing in which she claimed to have not been paid

Civil Code Section 1717: $281,058 Fee Award To Prevailing Party Affirmed Even Though Damage Award Only $60,500

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

  Contentiousness of Opponent Was One Factor Justifying the Hefty Award.      Defendant in a contract dispute with plaintiff won $60,500 in damages, beating a Code of Civil Procedure section 998 pretrial offer of $62,001 (after preoffer costs were added in) made by plaintiff. Then, due to a contractual fees clause in the operative agreement,

Private Attorney General Statute: Center For Biological Diversity Decision Now Certified For Publication In Entirety.

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

     In our May 28, 2010 post, we reported on the decision of Center For Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino, a decision that was partially published but was not certified for publication on the discussion of a fee award under California’s private attorney general statute. We can now report that the entire decision

Civil Rights: $137,502.46 Supplemental Fee Award Affirmed In Favor OF Monthly Prison Magazine Publisher

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Ninth Circuit Disagrees with Seventh Circuit Over Fee Recovery for Compliance Activities and Also Reject That Laffey Matrix Had to Be Used in Determining Reasonable Hourly Rates.      Prison Legal News v. Schwarzenegger, Case No. 09-15006 (9th Cir. June 9, 2010) (for publication) is an interesting Ninth Circuit decision regarding what fees are awardable under

Private Attorney General Statute: CEQA Winner Entitled To Substantial Fee Recovery As Well As Fees For Prevailing On Appeal

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

  Fourth District, Division 1 Affirms $265,715.55 Fee Award Under CCP Section 1021.5.      In Center For Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino, Case Nos. D056652/D056648 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 25, 2010) (certified for partial publication; fee discussion not published), two nonprofit organizations successfully challenged the County of San Bernardino’s approval of an

Scroll to Top