Cases: Retainer Agreements

Ethics, Interest, Reasonableness Of Fees, Retainer Agreements: Where Fee Agreement Is Compliant/Enforceable Under B&P § 6148, Unconscionability Factor Guides Contractual Fees Charged And Reasonableness Governs Atty. Performance Under Retainer Agreement

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Interest, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

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 […]

Retainer Agreements: 4/2 DCA Unpublished Decision Holds That B&P § 6147 Voiding Of Contingency Agreement Is Subject To One-Year Legal Malpractice Statute Of Limitations

Cases: Retainer Agreements

No Direct Authority On Point, But Reasoning From One Decision Drove The Conclusion.             Lee v. Newman, Case No. E073745 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 4, 2021) (unpublished), a messy attorney-client retainer agreement/conversion dispute, is noteworthy for one issue which we found to be of interest.  There, a client argued that an attorney’s contingency agreement

Ethics, Retainer Agreements: December 2020 Article In The Orange County Lawyer Has Nine Practical Tips To Increase Collections And Avoid Costly Fee Disputes

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Retainer Agreements

Local Orange County Attorney Michael S. LeBoff Provides The Nine Tips.             In the December 2020 edition of the Orange County Lawyer magazine, Michael S. LeBoff, a partner at Klein & Wilson, in Newport Beach, California, has authored an article entitled “Increase Collections and Avoid Costly Fee Disputes:  Nine Practical Tips.”  We now summarize some

Retainer Agreements, Trade Secrets: In The Absence Of An Express Retainer Agreement Otherwise, Fees Earned Under Uniform Trade Secrets Act Belong To The Attorney, Not The Client

Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Trade Secrets

Third District Applied Analogous Reasoning From Flannery Decision.             Many times, “ownership” of an attorney’s fees award can be critical—does it belong to the attorney or the client, especially after disputes fester?  The Third District in Aerotek, Inc. v. Johnson Group Staffing Co., Inc., Case No. C078435 (3d Dist. Sept. 15, 2020) (published) decided where

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

Scroll to Top