Result in Recent Unpublished Decision Shows How Attorney’s Fees May Eclipse the Amount in Controversy. Our Mission Statement reflects that attorney’s fees are frequently the tail that wags the litigation dog, meaning that recovery of fees may be essential to a prevailing party trying to vindicate its interest in a case with an amount […]
Rationale Parallels Result by Different Division of Second District in Superior Property of Carson v. Regency Outdoor Advertising. In our April 17, 2009 post, we examined Superior Property of Carson LLC v. Regency Outdoor Advertising, Inc., a Second District, Division 3 unpublished decision that affirmed a substantial fee award under Civil Code section 1717,
Second District, Division 3 Finds Defendant Lessors Prevailed Despite Claim of “Triplicative” Work By Three Law Firms. The next one is a wild one and illustrates that substantial attorney’s fees will be awarded under Civil Code section 1717 once the court determines which litigants “prevailed” by achieving their main objectives in the germane
Fourth District, Division 1 Rejects WOW Argument and Affirms Fee Award To Winner in Appeal of Summary Judgment Ruling. If you are a reader of our blog, you know that we have a POOF! category—our way of designating cases where fee awards vanish after there has been reversal of any underlying merits judgment
Second District, Division 6 Affirms Substantial Fee Award Based on “Tenaciousness” Factor. For all attorneys winning contentious real estate litigation with a contractual fees clause, you may have a good chance of recouping most of your fees on behalf of clients under Civil Code section 1717, especially where your opponent was aggressive and tenacious
11th Circuit Upholds Denial of Attorney’s Fees Where Attorney Failed to Provide Pre-Litigation Notice of Claim Before Suing Other Attorneys Under FLSA. Hat Tip to Benjamin G. Shatz of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, for bringing Sahyers v. Prugh, Holliday & Karatinos, L.P. (11th Cir. No. 08-10848, March 3, 2009) (published) to
First District, Division 4 Rebuffs Challenge to $18,750 Fee Award. The next case trumpets a familiar refrain that we have seen from many appellate decisions: a contention asking for denial or reduction of fees in any award needs to be supported by specific argumentation and specific evidence. Otherwise, the contention may well be found
Second District, Division Two Discusses Aggregation Appealability Rule and Litigant’s Discovery Obligations. The next case we discuss has an interesting discussion of the aggregation appealability rule (sanctions order must exceed $5,000) and a litigant’s discovery obligations (even an alter ego defendant must provide discovery information of which he is aware, even if the defendant
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.
