Cases: SLAPP

Appeal Sanctions, SLAPP: $21,870.09 In Appellate SLAPP Fees Affirmed Where Prevailing Defendant Obtained Dismissal Of A SLAPP Merits Appeal For Being Untimely

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: SLAPP

Appellate Court Also Sanctioned Appellant’s Attorney For Relying On Unpublished DCA Opinions.             Westreich v. Higa, Case No. B293726 (2d Dist., Div. 5 May 5, 2020) (unpublished) has two big warnings for attorneys arguing before California appellate courts:  make sure you have a reporter’s transcript in the appellate record when you are challenging the amount […]

SLAPP: $3,250 Fee Award To Winning SLAPP Defendant Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: SLAPP

Trial Judge Showed Discretion By Reducing Down The Fee Request Of $5,265 Based On The Hours Requested.             In Olson v. Sardi, Case No. E071991 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Apr. 30, 2020) (unpublished), defendant successfully won a SLAPP motion based on a negative review of plaintiff for counseling services to his son, with the review

Fees On Fees, SLAPP: SLAPP Fee Awards To Employee And His Counsel Totaling $136,285.50 Plus Another $33,007.50 In Fees On Fees Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Fees on Fees, Cases: SLAPP

Plaintiff CEO Was Unable To Prove His Claim Against Employee And His Counsel For Their Efforts To Add Him As Judgment Debtor To Underlying Lawsuit Stemmed From Malicious Prosecution As Opposed To Protected Activity.             Khanna v. Sonasoft Corp. – from our July 13, 2016 and October 15, 2019 posts – is the underlying

Celebrities, SLAPP: Where Denied SLAPP Motion Was Not Frivolous, Plaintiffs Successfully Defending Against Motion Were Not Entitled To Fees

Cases: Celebrities, Cases: SLAPP

Determination Of Frivolousness Of SLAPP Motion Is Within Discretion Of Trial Court, But 2/1 DCA’s Partial Reversal Of Trial Court’s Denial Was Further Evidence That SLAPP Motion Was Not Frivolous.             In Oldman v. Bates, Case No. B296539 (2d Dist., Div. 1 March 27, 2020) (unpublished), Kurt Oldman and Dieter Hartmann were hired by

SLAPP: $31,990 Fee Award To Winning SLAPP Cross-Defendants Had To Be Revisited When Appellate Court Found SLAPP Motion Only Partially Successful

Cases: SLAPP

A “Re-Do” Was In Order Here.             SLAPP cross-defendants likely were pleased when a trial judge granted a SLAPP motion, followed by a $31,990 fee award based on the mandatory SLAPP fee-shifting statute.  Well, the result was tarnished a bit based on the appellate court’s decision in Sarao v. Barker, Case Nos. B294816/B296391 (2d Dist.,

SLAPP TWO-FER: $40,200 And $5,250 SLAPP Mandatory Fee Awards Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: SLAPP

Also, Plaintiff In One Matter Was Not Entitled to Fees For Frivolous SLAPP Motion Where Defendant Partially Prevailed By Knocking Out Allegations.             1.  Spencer v. Sinclair, Case No. C082485 (3d Dist. Dec. 23, 2019) (unpublished): One defendant won a SLAPP motion, requesting $51,196 in mandatory attorney’s fees (with reasonableness of the amount requested

SLAPP: $44,890 Mandatory Fee Award To Defendants Affirmed On Appeal Due To Failure To Explicitly Show Error In Briefing

Cases: SLAPP

Defendants Had Sought $50,190.             In Breeze v. Baer, Case Nos. D073898/D074381 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 12, 2019) (unpublished), defendants won a SLAPP motion—affirmed on appeal—and a subsequent fee award of $44,890 (out of a requested $50,190).  The fee award was affirmed on appeal, too.  Appellant challenged the hourly rates as excessive and argued

SLAPP: Despite Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice And Filing Of Parallel Federal Case, SLAPP Moving Defendants Entitled To Recovery Of Some Mandatory Fees

Cases: SLAPP

However, As Against One Defendant, SLAPP Fees Not Allowable On Plaintiff’s Intentional Infliction Of Emotion Distress Claim.             In Astre v. McQuaid, Case No. A154945 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 31, 2019) (unpublished), defendants filed a SLAPP motion against plaintiff’s state court complaint, with plaintiff choosing to voluntarily dismiss it without prejudice and seeking relief

SLAPP: Fourth District Affirms $26,828.41 Fees/Costs Award To Successful SLAPPing Defendant Finding No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: SLAPP

Plaintiff Real Estate Developer Failed To Provide The 4th District With Any Evidence That The Award Was Excessive Or Biased.             In SCPB Holdings v. Taggett, Case No. D074991 (4th Dist., Div. 1 October 25, 2019) (unpublished), plaintiff real estate developer sued defendant and others for contractual interference and defamation, among other claims, after a

Scroll to Top