Denial Of $16,060 Sanctions Fee Request Was No Error Because It Was An Interim Ruling Not Impacting The Litigant’s Eventual Prevailing Party Status. In Aquino v. Klein, Case No. B301186 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 8, 2021) (unpublished), a dispute between friends, who went into business and then had a falling out romantically, resulted […]
Although Some Math Mistakes Were Made By Lower Court, Reduction Was Justified By The Record. In Micrel, LLC v. Zinn, Case Nos. A157136/A158069 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 6, 2021) (unpublished), defendant won a battle over whether a nondefamation liquidated provision seeking $1.3 million in damages was reasonable. The defense then sought $2,128,534.50 in
Original Judgment Creditor Had Satisfied Mediation Requirement In The Parties’ Fees Provision, And Defendants Failed To Raise Their Challenges To Specific Billing Entries Before The Trial Court Despite A Continuance To Allow Them To Do So. Plaintiff buyer entered into a Purchase Agreement with defendant sellers for the purchase of sellers’ home. The
Employee Had Requested Fees Of $168,749.47 After Garnering Compensatory Award Of $6,958.36. This case is another example of how non-compensable claim allocation and limited success can lead to a substantial reduction of a fee request even where there is some fee entitlement basis. In Caballero v. Bill Muncey Industries, Inc., Case No. D076628
Attorney Obtained Substantial Pretrial Attachment, But He Did Not Obtain Substantial Interest On Delinquent Fees Because No Interest Provision Was Present In The Retainer Agreement. Pech v. Morgan, Case No. B300524 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 11, 2021) (published) is an instructive decision indicating how enforceable, compliant fee agreements are dealt with in pretrial
Overlitigation Of Case By Attorney Personally Embroiled In A Suit And Incivility Concerns Justified A Reduction Of A Requested Fee. Karton v. Ari Design & Construction, Inc., Case No. B298003 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Mar. 9, 2021) (published) is a case rife with so many lessons, we cannot catalogue them all. However, it certainly
Broad Fee Clauses Were The Bases For The Affirmed Award. In Currency Corp. v. Wertheim, LLC, Case No. B276506 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 2, 2021) (unpublished), Wertheim initiated legal proceedings spanning 15 years, culminating in an arbitration in which it achieved nothing (according to the DCA panel) because part of the award was
Small Claims Work Excluded, So The Ultimate Modified Award Was $83,555; Compensatory Award Was $30,929.94 Plus Interest. In Ojeda v. Azulay, Case No. B302440 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 10, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiff employee prevailed against defendant employers on three of eight Labor Code claims after a two-day bench trial, and was awarded $30,929.94
Attorney Appealed Reduction With Only Speculation As To How The Probate Court Reached Amount Awarded – Providing No Reporter’s Transcript Or Settled Statement On Appeal. In Conservatorship and Estate of Bessard, Case No. A156773 (1st Dist., Div. 2 January 29, 2021) (unpublished), an attorney who had been appointed by the probate court to represent
Bottom Line In This Case, Limited Success Will Impact Cost and Fee Recovery, Even In Public Interest Cases. We have seen that costs and attorney’s fees in many public interest cases, including those under the private attorney general statute, can be quite large. However, one should keep in mind that the cost and fee
