Cases: Retainer Agreements

Retainer Agreement/Section 1717: Unsigned Retainer Agreement, With Explanation, Justified Fee Recovery By Attorney Under Civil Code Section 1717 Based Upon Dismissal Of Legal Malpractice Tort Claims

Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717

  Fee Clause Was Broad Enough To Allow For Recovery Of Fees, With Destruction Of Signed Fee Agreement By Terminated Attorney Not Precluding Recovery.      Stolz v. Fleischner, Case No. E062781 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 6, 2016) (unpublished) is a situation where a terminated attorney won a fee recovery of $27,120 (out of a […]

Lien For Attorney’s Fees, Retainer Agreements: Claimants In Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act Cannot Assign Attorney’s Fees Award To Handling Attorney

Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  Assignment Void Under The Anti-Assignment Act; However, Not All Is Lost—Contractual Attorney’s Lien Is Allowable As Against Government In CAFRA Actions.     Under the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA), successful claimants challenging the U.S. government’s seizure of property can obtain an attorney’s fee award against the government, which happened in the next case

Arbitration, Retainer Agreements: Tips For Successful Enforcement Of Arbitration Clauses In Fee Retainers

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  Tips Are Broad in Nature, But Also Guide California Practice.      We can tell you that Randy Evans and Shari Klevens of McKenna Long have provided some guidance to U.S. lawyers seeking to enforce fee retainer arbitration provisions in their recent Daily Report article entitled “Arbitration Provisions in Fee Agreements.”      Here are the

Arbitration/Prevailing Party/Retainer Agreements: Law Firm Winning Malpractice Phase Of Arbitration And Judicial Confirmation Award Proceedings Entitled To Recovery Of Over $2.19 Million In Attorney’s Fees Against Sophisticated Former Client Defenda

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  Arbitration Fee Clause Broad Enough to Encompass Torts, and Trope Waiver Clause Enforced For Judicial Confirmation Recovery Fees By Law Firm Personnel.      This next 2-1 decision, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan v. Kurtin, Case No. B250245 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Jul. 28, 2014) (unpublished), is an interesting one involving affirmance of an arbitration

Civil Rights/Deadlines/Retainer Agreements: In A Wild One, FEHA Plaintiffs Garner $542,142.50 Fee/$10,642.50 Cost Award Despite Fee Motion Being Filed Two Years Down The Line

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  Extraordinary Circumstances Justified Noncompliance With Deadlines, And Client/Attorney Agreement On How To Divide Statutory Fee Awards Did Not Violate Any Ethical Prohibitions.      Blythe v. County of Riverside, Case No. E055186 (4th Dist., Div. 2 July 16, 2014) (unpublished) is a wild FEHA fee/costs award case encompassing deadline, standing, and retainer agreement divisions of

Retainer Agreements: Trope Prohibition—A Suggestion On How To Potentially Recoup With The Right Retainer Language

Cases: Retainer Agreements

Gerald Knapton Provides Some Insights In Recent July 2014 California Lawyer. ​For anyone following our blog, you know about the Trope v. Katz, 11 Cal.4th 274, 292 (1995) prohibition which bans in pro per lawyers (subject to jurisprudence on lawyers truly involved with in pro per representation versus those truly advocating their independent interests in

Equity/Lodestar/Multiplier/Retainer Agreement: $7.8 Million Fee Recovery For Well Known L.A. Attorney’s Work In Divorce Cases Reversed

Cases: Equity, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  No Written Retainer Agreement, With Quantum Meruit Jury Verdict Overturned And Reduced To $1.8 Million Plus Some Other Deductions.      This is a doozy of a case involving well known Los Angeles attorney Hillel Chodos, who happened to not have had a written hourly or contingency retainer agreement with an ex-client, a wife involved

POOF!/Retainer Agreement/Prevailing Party and Section 1717: Appellate Court’s Reversal of Fee Disgorgement Order Meant Remand Necessary To See Who Prevailed

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717

  Client’s Fee/Costs Recovery of $688,634 Goes POOF! For Now.      In Fleischman v. Law Office of Paul Stanton, Case No. B216898 (2d Dist., Div. 8 June 12, 2014) (unpublished), which involved nasty conservatorship/elder abuse claims among trust beneficiaries with respect to a deceased trustee, client was able to invalidate a retainer agreement which placed

Retainer Agreement: Invalidity Of Attorney Lien Provision Does Not Invalidate Attempts To Recover For Breach Of Retainer Agreement Or Recover Fees Under Contractual Fees Clause

Cases: Retainer Agreements

  Failure to Appeal Fee Order Was Dispositive, But Invalidity Ruling Was Back Up Reason Fee Recovery Was Allowable Anyway.      In Pierson v. Burlison, Case No. B244908 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 22, 2014) (unpublished), the appellate court decided two things of interest in the retainer agreement/fee areas: (1) an invalid attorney’s lien

POOF!/Retainer Agreements: Although Attorney’s Retainers Had Unlawful Provisions, Attorney Did Not Seek To Enforce Them, With Disgorgement Of Previously Paid Fees Reversed

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Retainer Agreements

  Appellate Court Also Reversed and Remanded Fee Award Against Attorney in Light of Disgorgement Reversal.      This next case, Fleischman v. Stanton, Case No. B216898 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Nov. 19, 2013) (unpublished), is a wild one involving an ex-attorney whose retainer agreement was voided as well as having the trial judge ordering him

Scroll to Top