Cases: Section 998

Landlord/Tenant, Section 998, POOF!: Landlord And Tenant, In Lengthy Litigation Over Personal Property In A Westlake Village Luxury Home, Lose Both Their Attorney’s Fees Awards On Appeal

Cases: Landlord/Tenant, Cases: POOF!, Cases: Section 998

After Ten Years Of Litigation, Tenant Only Received A $56,000 Net Recovery—Not Exactly A Win When All Of The Attorney Efforts Are Considered!             Christie v. Ridge, Case No. B259189 (2d Dist., Div. 6 February 6, 2019) (unpublished), although unpublished, is a nice reminder of how costly litigation is and how both litigants winning attorney’s […]

Section 998: Defendant With Strong Defense Entitled To $30,410.91 In Expert Witness Fees When Plaintiff Rejected 998 Offer And Defendant Prevailed

Cases: Section 998

Weakness Of Case And Strength Of Defenses Must Be Considered Before Rejecting Offers.             In Del Norte Senior Center, Inc. v. Stelling, Case No. A145016 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 25, 2019) (unpublished), defendant was awarded $30,410.91 in expert witness fees after she defensed plaintiff in a contentious accounting dispute. She had earlier offered to

Section 998: No Attorney’s Fees Recoverable By CCP § 998 Prevailing Party In California Disabled Persons Act/Unruh Act Case Because No Liability Finding That Plaintiff’s Rights Under These Statutes Were Violated In Case Seeking Monetary Damages

Cases: Section 998

If You Want Fees As A Plaintiff, Make Sure You Have A Liability Determination.                      Linton v. County of Contra Costa, Case No. A153188 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 23, 2019) (partially published; section 998 discussion published) is a stark reminder for plaintiff disability attorneys: if you want fee recovery under an accepted CCP §

Section 998: 2/2 DCA Decides Three Factors Are Especially Pertinent In Determining If CCP § 998 Offer Was Made In Good Faith

Cases: Section 998

Those Factors Are: (1) How Far Into The Litigation Was The Offer Made; (2) Information Available To the Offeree Prior To The Offer’s Expiration; and (3) Whether The Offeree Informed Offeror That It Lacked Sufficient Information To Evaluate, And The Offeror’s Response.             We have posted many times on CCP § 998 offers, which can

Allocation, Section 998, Trespass: 4/1 DCA Affirms Award Of $289,153.75 In Fees Under CCP § 1021.9 To Plaintiff Who Used Land For Intended Nursery Plantings As Against Neighboring Rock Quarry

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 998, Cases: Trespass

Section 1021.9 Applies To Land Characteristic As A Whole, Not Just Portion Of Land Trespassed Upon; Pre-Offer Fees And Costs Did Not Disturb The Result Under CCP § 998.             In Hoffman v. Superior Ready Mix Concrete, L.P., Case No. D072929 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 19 2018) (published), plaintiff owned property intended to be

Consumer Statutes, Section 998: Plaintiff Winning Only $2,636.50 In Attorney’s Fees And Costs In Lemon Law Case Was Entitled To Reversal And Remand

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Section 998

Trial Judge Improperly Imposed CCP § 998 Sanctions When Offer Was Improper, Such That Cut-Off Fee Determination Was An Abuse of Discretion.             In Etcheson v. FCA US LLC, Case No. D072793 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 6, 2018) (unpublished), plaintiff brought a “lemon law” action relating to a $40,000 purchase of a 2010 Chrysler

Costs, Probate, Section 998: Insurance Company Controlling Litigation Is De Facto Party Under Probate Code, Liable For Litigation Costs Under Rejected CCP § 998 Offer

Cases: Costs, Cases: Probate, Cases: Section 998

Because Insurance Company Controls The Litigation, Court Looks Past "Legal Fiction" That Decedent's Estate Is The Party.         Amanda Meleski was injured when Albert Hotlen ran a red light and collided with her vehicle. But by the time Mr. Hotlen could be served with a summons, he was dead. However, Mr. Hotlen had purchased

Civil Rights, Section 998: 2/8 DCA Holds, For Pre-2019 Cases, That Plaintiffs In Nonfrivolous FEHA Suits Are Not Entitled To Costs Shifting Under CCP § 998

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Section 998

Panel Agrees With Reasoning In Arave Opinion So Holding.             Effective January 1, 2019, the Legislature has determined that plaintiffs in FEHA cases found to be nonfrivolous in nature do not face fee, costs, or expert witness fee exposure under the FEHA shifting statute or even under CCP § 998 after rejection of a 998

Consumer Statutes, Section 998: Lemon Law Fee Award Which Was A 78% Reduction From Request Reversed And Remanded Because Post-998 Offer Fees Should Have Been Considered And Appellate Court Unclear Whether Proper Lodestar Analysis Conducted By Lower Court

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Section 998

Size Of The Reduction Obviously Bothered Appellate Court, Although Its Statements On Level Of Detail Of State Court Fee Award Seems To Point Toward Adoption Of More Detailed Federal Court Analysis.             McCullough v. FCA US, LLC, Case No. D073330 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 9, 2018) (unpublished) is an interesting “lemon law” case where

Scroll to Top