Part 2 of 2 – We Finish Off With The Last Five Cases And An “Honorable Mention” Oh, the suspense … and the ball has not yet dropped from above Times Square. You have to go to our prior post to see the first part of this list. Here is the rest of […]
First District, Division Two Finds Relevant Geographic Market for Hourly Rate Determination Not Limited to Case Venue and Resolves Split in Decisional Authority on Costs in Favor of Trial Court Discretion. As the Thanksgiving Holidays have drawn close, our state appellate courts have issued a plethora of interesting opinions in the attorney’s fees/costs arena.
Fourth District, Division One Rules That Lower Court May Have Not Used Proper Lodestar Determination Factors in Drastically Cutting Fee Request, Suggesting It Parts Company From Reasoning in The Second District’s EnPalm Decision. Notwithstanding the breadth of the abuse of discretion standard, the next case illustrates that appellate court will overturn fee awards
Transylvania Feral Court Slashes Attorney’s Fees Award Drastically For Spoor Work Product. Although we usually confine our posts to California-oriented cases, settlements, or fee issues, the following fee reduction ruling by a Philadelphia-based federal district judge was too good to pass up and also offers some sobering lessons to practitioners seeking fee awards when
Second District Affirms Lower Court Determinations in the “Wild One.” Who says that unpublished decisions lack drama and all of emotions that go with litigation, even in posttrial attorney’s fees proceedings. Not us, and the next case backs us up on this conclusion. Lu v. Grewal, Case No B201355 (2d Dist.,
Six-Plus Hours During Trial Not Deemed Unreasonable For Litigation Attorney’s Efforts. Client retained a trial litigation Attorney less than two months before a trial in which she claimed ownership to an Oakland condominium even though her relatives paid significant mortgage expenses and loan interest costs on the condominium. Attorney hit the
Court of Appeal Sustains Reductions by Trial Court and Suggests That Fees Expended by the Opposition Has Probative Value in Fee Proceedings. In Horsford v. Board of Trustees of California State University (Horsford I), 132 Cal.App.4th 359, 402 (2005), the Fifth District Court of Appeal determined a trial court had applied
District Court Will Not Award Requested $2 Million in Fees Sought by Individual Plaintiffs. In early August 2008, the Ninth Circuit decided that anything more than a 10% fee "haircut" to prevailing civil rights plaintiffs is seldom justifiable unless specific reasons are set forth for more drastic reductions. See Moreno v.
Chief Justice Kozinski Overturns Excessive Fee Haircut And Sets A Presumptive 10% Standard For Review of Fee Haircuts. Part of blogging is to recognize and “hat tip” posts by our colleagues. Greg May, of the California Blog of Appeal, posted a very informative post on Moreno v. City of Sacramento, Case
