Cases: Retainer Agreements

Retainer Agreements: Trial Court Erred In Narrow Interpretation Of Retainer Agreement That Did Not Hold Client Responsible For Unpaid Fees/Costs

Cases: Retainer Agreements

Pursuant To Statutory Rules Of Contract Interpretation, Contracts Should Be Construed As A Whole So As To Interpret The Mutual Intention Of The Parties.             In Lerner & Veit v. Power, Case No. A158322 (1st Dist., Div. 5 August 31, 2020) (unpublished), plaintiff law firm and defendant client entered into a written retainer agreement  wherein […]

Reasonableness Of Fees, Retainer Agreements: Lower Court Properly Denied Attorney’s Fees And Costs For Winning $7,580 Against Ex-Client In Fee Collection Case

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Reason Was That Matter Should Have Been Brought As Limited Civil Case Rather Than An Unlimited One.             Code of Civil Procedure section 1033 grants a trial court discretion to deny, in whole or in part, a plaintiff’s recovery of litigation costs, including attorney’s fees, where the plaintiff brought the action as an unlimited

Retainer Agreements: Third District Rebuffs B&P 6147(b) Challenge To “Related Matters” Retention Language In Contingency Agreement

Cases: Retainer Agreements

The Language In The Contingency Agreement, Sustained On Appeal, Offers Some Drafting Tips To Attorneys In Fashioning Their Retainer Agreements.             Some drafting tips for retainer agreements are presented through the result affirmed in Meagher v. Robinson Bradford LP, Case No. C087478 (3d Dist. Apr. 21, 2020) (unpublished), where attorneys fought back several challenges to

Deadlines, Retainer Agreements, Section 1717: 4/1 DCA Affirms $108,848.50 Attorney Fees Award To Prevailing Plaintiff Attorney For Work In Seeking Unpaid Fees And In Defending Against Former Client’s Cross-Complaint

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717

Balance Of Unpaid Fees And Costs Were $31,147.17 When Former Client Stopped Making Agreed-Upon Monthly Installment Payments Of $200.             In Delisi v. Wagner, Case Nos. D074728 and D075506 (4th Dist., Div. 1 January 27, 2020) (unpublished), an attorney sued his former client for unpaid fees and costs when Former Client stopped making monthly

Arbitration, Nonsignatories, Quantum Meruit, Retainer Agreements: Judgment Confirming Arbitration Award Of $1,273,765.91 In Fees Owed To Two Law Firms Plus Another $508,678.82 For Fees And Costs Incurred In The Arbitration Affirmed

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Nonsignatories, Cases: Quantum Meruit, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Arbitration Was Properly Ordered Because The Claims Between Client And The Two Law Firms Arose Out Of The Underlying Retainer And Arbitration Agreements Client Signed With The First Law Firm.             Client retained a law firm to represent her in an ongoing dissolution action – signing a Retainer Agreement and a binding Arbitration Agreement.  During

Liens For Attorney Fees, Retainer Agreements: Broad Retainer Lien Language Relating To A Lien For General Representation Did Allow For Attorney’s Lien Claim Work

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Also, Lien Claim Work Can Encompass Unrelated Work To A Specific Litigation Case.             In Callahan & Blaine v. Vogeler, Case No. G055912 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 24, 2019) (unpublished), attorney-defendant in pro per balked at a contractual breach lawsuit brought by Callahan & Blaine—a well-known Orange County law firm—based on broad attorney lien

Liens For Attorney Fees, Retainer Agreements: ABA’s Formal Opinion 487 Clarifies Successor Counsel Duties In Contingency Case To Notify Client About Potential Repercussions With Respect To Original Counsel

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Successor Counsel Has At Least A Warning Duty, And Successor Counsel May Have More Obligations If That Counsel Tries To Resolve Dispute With Prior Counsel.             We can report that the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility recently released Formal Opinion 487, for which we provide a hyperlink.  It deals with

Ethics, Retainer Agreements: On Remand, Trial Court Properly Found Equitable Estoppel Did Not Alter The Rule Invalidating Fee Sharing Among Attorneys

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Equitable Estoppel Theory Was Not Supported By The Evidence.             On December 19, 2012, we posted on Barnes, Crosby, Fitzgerald & Zeman, LLP v. Ringler, 212 Cal.App.4th 172 (2012) [discussed in our December 19, 2012 post], which held that a party may be equitably estopped from enforcing the rule which prohibits attorney fee splitting where

Ethics, Retainer Agreements: California Supreme Court Decides That Undisclosed Conflict Of Interest Rendered Retention Agreement And Arbitration Award Unenforceable, But Remands For Trial Court To Consider If Quantum Meruit Recovery Was Permissible

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Lots of Questions Remain, Given This Was Not An FAA Case; However, Boilerplate Conflict Waivers Do Not Do The Trick.             The California Supreme Court has just come out with a widely-watched opinion in Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton v. J-M Manufacturing Company, Inc., Case No. S232946 (Cal. Supreme Court August 30, 2018) (published), although it

Retainer Agreements: Los Angeles County Superior Court Invalidates Oral Entertainment “Handshake” Fee Contingency Deals Not In Writing

Cases: Retainer Agreements

Case Involved Johnny Depp, And May Send Some Ripples Through Entertainment Industry.             This next case, although only at a state superior court level, may send some shock waves on how entertainment agreements are structured between actors and their lawyers.             What happened here is that Johnny Depp challenged millions of dollars paid out to

Scroll to Top