Cases: Settlement

Reasonableness Of Fees/Section 1717/Settlement: Plaintiff Breaching Settlement Agreement With Fees Clause Gets Hit With $110,000 In Attorney’s Fees Even Though Specific Settlement Judge Refused To Hear Post-Settlement Fee Motion

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Settlement

  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 […]

Eminent Domain/Settlement: Condemnee Was Paid Promised Litigation Expenses Under Settlement Agreement At Trial Level

Cases: Eminent Domain, Cases: Settlement

  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

Assignment/Section 1711/Probate: Settlement Agreement Did Justify Attorney’s Fees Award Of $51,236.21 Against Petitioners, But Not Against A Nonsignatory

Cases: Assignment, Cases: Probate, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Settlement

  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 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 8, 2011) (unpublished), although a probate action, actually is a Civil Code section 1717 fees clause case, with the fee award affirmed by a 3-0

Interpretation Of Fee Clauses: Settlement Agreement Plus Integrated Other Documents With Fees Clauses Establish Fee Entitlement

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Settlement

  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      Wyatt v. Wyatt, Case No. D058493 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 6, 2012) (unpublished)–yep, today we have a lot of family dispute cases, with this one being between mother and son over mother’s house–resulted in an attorney’s fees award under a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

Section 998: $62,638.20 Expert Witness 998 Expense Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Settlement

  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      This next unpublished decision, Van Alstyne v. Carter, Case No. C064004 (3d Dist.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

Costs/998 Offers: Defense Beating Its Own 998 Offer Got A Nice Reward–$369,850 Costs Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Costs, Cases: Settlement

  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

Costs/Settlement: With Prejudice Dismissal Of Complaint Meant Costs Recovery Was Mandatory For Prevailing Defendant

Cases: Costs, Cases: Settlement

  Settlement Agreement Had No Waiver of Costs, Which Led to Reversal of an Order Denying Costs.      There definitely is a practice lesson is the next case where a prevailing defendant obtained reversal of an order striking/taxing routine costs in postjudgment proceedings.      Robertson v. St. John, Case No G043635 (4th Dist., Div. 3

Scroll to Top