Cases: Section 1717

Consumer Statutes And Requests For Admissions: Court Of Appeal Denies Unfair Competition Defendants’ Request For Fees Under Section 17200 Or Under RFA Sanctions Statute

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Section 1717

No Basis For Fees Based On Defensed Claims; No Abuse of Discretion in Denying RFA Sanctions.       In Chichi v. Ennen, Case No. D053410 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 18, 2009) (unpublished), plaintiffs brought a class action under California’s unfair competition statute based on violations of several other California statutes. After plaintiffs rested their case-in-chief […]

Civil Code Section 1717 Apportionment: Trial Court Did Not Err In Failing To Apportion Fees Where Conjoined Claims Cannot Be Separate For Fee Recovery Purposes

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

Second District, Division 4 So Rules in Unpublished Decision.      Apportionment of attorney’s fees, as between covered and uncovered claims, is a discretionary call, as the next decision demonstrates.      Hur v. Lee, Case No. B210502 c/w BC361921 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Sept. 9, 2009) (unpublished) involved a sushi restaurant seller and his brokers, who

Corporate Dissolution: Voluntary Dissolution Action, With Only A Buy-Sell Agreement Containing a Fees Clause In the Background, Did Not Entitle Petitioning Shareholder To Fees

Cases: Section 1717

Sixth District Affirms Fee Denial by Lower Court.      As we have stated before, the first step in seeking fee recovery in California state courts is to find a firm fee “entitlement anchor,” either a contract or statute conferring the ability for a litigant to recoup attorney’s fees. In the next case, there was a

Settlement: Attorney’s Fees Awarded When Party Seeking Enforcement Of Settlement Agreement Did Not Expressly Obtain Retention Of Jurisdiction Prior To Lawsuit Dismissal

Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Settlement

First District, Division 3 Highlights Pitfalls of CCP Section 664.6 in the Retention of Jurisdiction Area.      Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 concerns judicial enforcement of settlement agreements through an expeditious motion procedure. The last sentence of this provision states: “If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to

Prevailing Party: Voluntary Settlement Of Contractually-Based Claims, Even Though In Tort Or Equity, Prevents Award Of Fees Under Santisas

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Fifth District So Rules In Unpublished Decision, Rejecting That “Labels” Rather Than Substance Are Governing.       Santisas v. Goodin, 17 Cal.4th 599 (1998) [one of our Leading Cases] held that Civil Code section 1717 bars an action voluntarily dismissed as a result of a settlement to the extent contract claims were involved in the dismissed

Civil Rights: Rejected Informal Settlement Offers Can Be Used As An Indicator Of Success For Purposes of Calculating Attorney’s Fees Lodestar

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Settlement

Third Circuit Court of Appeals So Holds Under 42 U.S. C. Section 1988; California State Court Decisions Split In Analogous Areas, But Ninth Circuit Disagrees.      On July 23, 2009, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in Lohman v. Duryea Borough, __ F.3d __, 2009 WL 2183056 (3d Cir. 2009), affirmed a district judge’s decision

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff Who Dismissed Action But Beat Back Defense Fee Request Was Not Prevailing Party Under Civil Code Section 1717 In The Overall Sense So As To Garner Fees For Beating Opposition Fee Request

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Second District, Division 6 Follows Presley and Mustachio in so Deciding.      The beginning quote in this case nicely summarizes the lesson from the next case: “A party who prevails on appeal is not necessarily the prevailing party in an action.”      Wood v. Santa Monica Escrow Co., Case No. B205939 (2d Dist., Div. 6

Civil Code Section 1717 And Alter Ego Case: Litigant Beating Alter Ego Theory Entitled to Fee Award

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Second District, Division 4 Affirms $20,000 Fees/Cost Award to Alter Ego Winner.      In Legacy Construction and Development, Inc. v. De Francesca, Case No. B208851 (2d Dist., Div. 4 July 13, 2009) (unpublished), a defendant, following presentation of plaintiff’s declaratory relief case, obtained a ruling that he was not the alter ego of a separate

Scroll to Top