Trope Prohibition At Issue. In Catanzarite Law Corp. v. Michelman & Robinson, Case No. G048540 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 19, 2015) (unpublished), two defendant law firms SLAPP-ed a plaintiff law firm suing the defendants in a suit by which plaintiff claimed the other firms interfered with plaintiff’s contingency fee agreement between ex-clients […]
Trope, Conflict, and Partial Success Challenges Unsuccessful On Appeal. In Creger v. Hudson 141 Homeowners Assn., Case No. B247480 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 5, 2015) (unpublished), condo owner sued the HOA, property manager, HOA attorneys, and his own attorneys for certain actions relating to a prior condo defect suit, getting SLAPPed based
Below Market San Diego Hourly Rates, Combined With Explanation Of Work Effort, Sustained Result. In Galicia v. Spencer, Case Nos. D063758/D064441 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 27, 2015) (unpublished), plaintiffs lost a SLAPP motion to the defense based on certain state immunities to civil/constitutional rights allegations, which then resulted in a $28,448 mandatory
Award Was Mandatory Under SLAPP Statute, Amount Was Fine. Under this category, we have blogged on many cases where mandatory fee awards are appropriate to prevailing defendants under the SLAPP fee-shifting statute. In Chapman v. City of Palmdale, Case Nos. B251913/B254125 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 13, 2015) (unpublished), the appellate court
Reason Was Matter Remanded To Determine If Defense Met Burden To SLAPP For Several Causes of Action. The SLAPP statute certainly has generated a lot of jurisprudence since its enactment. The defense winning a SLAPP motion gets mandatory reasonable, causally-related fees, while a plaintiff subject to a frivolous SLAPP motion can get discretionary
Also, CCP § 177.5 $1,000 Sanctions Award Reviewable Only By Writ. In Shalant v. Mackston, Case No. B250208 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Dec. 8, 2014) (unpublished), defendants won a SLAPP motion—the merits of which were never appealed—and plaintiff suffered a combined adverse fee award of $138,972 under the mandatory SLAPP fee-shifting statute. One
However, Winning Plaintiff Attorney Negotiating Personal Injury Settlement Not Entitled to SLAPP Fee-Shifting Fees or Frivolous Appeal Sanctions. Well, we have an appellate court decision saying fees disputes do not rise to constitutional protected activity under the SLAPP statute. We are not offended, because these usually are more in the nature of private
Appeal From Voluntary Dismissal of Remaining Claims Was Untimely. Defendant winning an anti-SLAPP motion on many claims sought to recover fees of $56,062.50 after learning that plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the remaining claims. Unfortunately, defendant moved to recoup SLAPP fees based on the date of the voluntary dismissal, rather than the earlier anti-SLAPP order
A Twist: SLAPP Attorney’s Fees Not At Issue Here – Rather “Wrongful” Distribution Of Funds Held By Attorney Leads To Lawsuit And SLAPP Motion. In the typical SLAPP case we report about, the issue is whether attorney’s fees will be recovered for prevailing on a SLAPP motion. But in our next case, the
1.25 Multiplier Allowed, Lack of Specific Challenges Did Not Lead to Major Reductions, and Prior SLAPP Awards Were Not Dispositive. If you have followed our blog, you known there is a mandatory fee-shifting statute in favor of SLAPP defendant winners. In Lunada Biomedical v. Nunez, Case Nos. B243205/B246602 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Oct.
