Attacks on Jurisdiction Rebuffed, Garnering $15,592 in Fees When Motion to Void Judgment Denied. We commend all litigators to read the unpublished decision in Stone v. Stone, Case No. B239097 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 18, 2012) (unpublished). It involves husband’s attempt to void a settlement agreement/merged judgment reached in a bitter dispute […]
Fees Were Less Than Requested Based on Defendants’ Excessive Litigation Style, But Were Justified Because Plaintiff Did Everything Possible Not To Pay Under the Settlement. Civil Code section 1717 fee proceedings are equitable in nature. Don’t think for one moment that trial judges presiding over fee motions do not factor in each side’s
However, Remand Was Necessary to Fix His Litigation Expenses on Appeal. Department of Transportation reached a settlement with condemnee for a right of way purchase under which DOT agreed to pay a certain sum inclusive of interest, fee, and costs. DOT paid. Condemnee, not satisfied, filed a costs memorandum claiming $38,957.50 in costs
Although Controlling the Litigation, Nonsignatory Had No Rights Assigned Under The Fees-Clause Bearing Settlement Agreement. Estate of Bennett, Case Nos. G043050 et al. (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 8, 2011) (unpublished), although a probate action, actually is a Civil Code section 1717 fees clause case, with the fee award affirmed by a 3-0
Integration Doctrine Sustained Fee Award. Wyatt v. Wyatt, Case No. D058493 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 6, 2012) (unpublished)–yep, today we have a lot of family dispute cases, with this one being between mother and son over mother’s house–resulted in an attorney’s fees award under a settlement agreement in favor of mom and
Premature Filing of Costs Memorandum Was Not Fatal. In Tate v. Prendergast, Case No. G044621 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 7, 2011) (unpublished), personal injury plaintiff seeking $750,000 in damages rejected a CCP § 998 offer of $20,001 but only was awarded $300 for past medical expenses by a jury. This kicked in
$11,143,50 Fee Award to Defense for Enforcing Settlement Not Allowed. We all know by now that almost all state laws, including California, have a strong policy to promote settlement. After all, the court system would be overstressed and could not function if everything was tried (especially in these times of fiscal pressures). The
Reason Was That Expense Was Expressly Provided For And Proper On Its Face. This next unpublished decision, Van Alstyne v. Carter, Case No. C064004 (3d Dist. Oct. 18, 2011) (unpublished), is a nice complement to our recent posts of September 30 and October 19, 2011 on the recently published Second District decision in
Second District, Division 4 Rebuffs Multiple Challenges to Costs Award by Losing Plaintiff. We have often discussed how fee awards can be substantial and crippling; however, costs award can have the same sting, especially when substantial expert witness fees are shifted because a plaintiff rejected a CCP § 998 offer that the defense
Defendant Failed to Include a Waiver of Fees and Costs in the Settlement Agreement, Which Meant Fee Shifting Statute Allowed for Later Fee Motion. Here is a good one that reinforces an important lesson: when you settle, include a waiver of fees and costs in the settlement agreement. Without it, you may have
