$30,308 Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal, Less Than Ex-Wife’s Request For $80,000. In Marriage of Minkin, Case No. G052947 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 19, 2017 published; prior unpublished decision under date of April 24, 2017), the family law judge awarded $30,308 to ex-wife out of requested $80,000 in fees to […]
Dispute Arose Over Filming Rights For Jimi Hendrix’s 1969 Performance At London’s Royal Albert Hall. Photograph of Jimi Hendrix taken in Sweden. May 24, 1967. Wikipedia. Although unpublished, Experience Hendrix, LLC v. The Last Experience, Case No. B268414 (2d Dist., Div. 2 May 8, 2017) (unpublished) takes us down
$80,806.50 Fee Award Affirmed Where $11,642.10 Compensatory Damages And Cancellation Of Car Loan Was The End Result. Replica of first car made and sold by Toyota: the 1936 Toyota Standard Sedan AA. Photo: Bertel Schmitt. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. In Valencia v. Hooman Toyota of
Refiling The Case In A Different Jurisdiction Was The Key Distinction. In DisputeSuite.com, LLC v. Scoreinc.com, Case No. S226652 (Cal. Supreme Court Apr. 6, 2017) (published), our state supreme court faced the issue of whether fee recovery under Civil Code section 1717 was properly denied against a litigant obtaining a dismissal of an
Plaintiff Sued On An Oral Agreement Which Was Not Within The Scope Of Stock Purchase Agreement Fee Clause Relied On By The Defense. Fee entitlement is a basic issue, often tethered to whether a fees clause in a written contract covers the claims at issue in a complaint or cross-complaint. If it
Plaintiff Also Hit With Some Costs, But Some Non-Statutory And Discretionary Costs Were Stricken. Plaintiff borrowers brought a multi-count contractual/tort/statutory claim-based suit against construction loan participants, ultimately attempting to dismiss the action without prejudice during trial. The trial judge determined the dismissal was not authorized and set it aside as void, further granting
Only Time Finite Fees On Trespass Claim Recoverable Under HOA Fee-Shifting Statute. In Hussein v. Driver, Case Nos. A144786/A145655 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 27, 2017) (unpublished), plaintiffs and defendants, homeowners in a common interest development as well as the parents of defendants, were drawn into a parking space dispute where slander of
No Written Contract—No 1717 Fees; Banks And Assignees—No Go Under 1717(c). In Professional Collection Consultants v. Brown, Case No. B270128 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Jan. 17, 2017) (unpublished), bank’s assignee (collection consultants) requested the trial judge to award it $148,792 in contractual attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717 or $800 in statutory
However, Prevailing Defense Was Entitled To Fees For Tort Claim Work Given Breadth Of Contractual Fees Clause. A trial judge in Khan v. Shim, Case No. H041608 (6th Dist. Dec. 29, 2016) (published) granted the prevailing defense all fees for defensive work incurred in defending against a complaint containing both contractual and tort claims following
However, Apportionment Was Required On Remand—Consideration Of Many Factors. In Bank of Southern California, N.A. v. D&D Goryoka, Inc., Case No. D069767 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 29, 2016) (unpublished), defendant/cross-complainant was denied a prevailing party fee request as against plaintiff/cross-defendant Bank to the tune of a $908,171.25 request (later reduced to $795,753).
