Cases: SLAPP – Page 25 – Cal Attorneys Fees

SLAPP/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees/Billing Records: Lower Court Did Not Err In Fashioning Three Fee Awards To Three Winning Defendants Successfully SLAPPing A Malicious Prosecution Action

December 7, 2013

Trial Judge Reduced Requests Substantially Due to Severely Redacted Billing Records and General Supporting Attorney Declaration; Further Reductions Not Justified. Three defendants (as well as their law firms) sought mandatory fee awards after SLAPPing plaintiff’s malicious prosecution action in Du Boise v Peterson, Case Nos. B237764/B240357 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Dec. 6, 2013) […]

SLAPP: $129,938.75 Fee Award To Prevailing Defendant Was No Abuse Of Discretion In Complicated Malicious Prosecution Claim

Cases: SLAPP

November 26, 2013

Correctness of Award Reinforced by $14,000 Reduction in Requested Fees. By now, you followers of our blog know that Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c) provides for a mandatory award of fees to a winning SLAPP defendant. Because these proceedings are often intensive and involve parsing through lots of documents/issues, large awards are

SLAPP: SLAPP Grant Affirmed, But Fee Award Reversed Because Law Firm Represented Itself In SLAPP Proceeding

Cases: SLAPP

October 17, 2013

$3,842 Fee Award Overturned. Two well-known Orange County based law firms squared off in Catanzarite Law Corp. v. Gordon & Rees, LLP, Case No. G047968 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 15, 2013) (unpublished). Plaintiff law firm accused defendant law firm of contractual interference after plaintiff’s former clients apparently did not pay plaintiff

SLAPP: Trial Judge Properly Did Not Award SLAPP Winners For Work Of “Of Counsel” Attorney Under Trope

Cases: SLAPP

October 17, 2013

Lawyer Promotional Listings and Social LinkedIn Proof Showed the Affiliation With The Firm Being Defended. Be careful of what you list out there. That is the lesson from this one, notwithstanding the proliferation of lawyer “hype” listings and LinkedIn social connections. In Jensen v. Charon Solutions, Inc., Case Nos. B240651/B244155 (2d Dist.,

Prevailing Party/SLAPP: Party Partially Winning Appeal Merits, But Not Winning Fee Award Cross-Appeal Was Not Entitled To Fee Recovery

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: SLAPP

October 17, 2013

Appellate Court Followed Maughan’s “Bright Line” Test on Appeal. In this one, the appellate court had to review whether a party truly prevailed on appeal in a prior appellate proceeding involving a SLAPP determination. The lower court said the party did, but the appellate court reversed. White and Yellow Cab, Inc. v.

SLAPP: SLAPP Grant Against First Attorney Cut Out Of Settlement Fee Recovery Reversed

Cases: SLAPP

October 5, 2013

Second Attorney’s SLAPP Grant Reversed Because Conduct Arose Out of Fee Dispute Over Value of Services, Not Protected Activities. Law Offices of Jacob Emrani v. Mininsohn, Case No. G047476 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 30, 2013) (unpublished; author: Justice Aronson) is a case where a second attorney obtained a SLAPP grant against a

SLAPP: Appellate Court Affirms Denial Of Attorney’s Fees To SLAPP Winner Who Succeeded In Striking Only Portions Of Defamation Claims

Cases: SLAPP

September 9, 2013

Court of Appeal Also Decides that Court Can Strike Portions of Claim Allegations in SLAPP Proceedings. Cross-defendant in a defamation cross-claim partially won a SLAPP motion by which the lower court granted the motion by striking SLAPP-able allegations and denied the motion by allowing the unprotected theories to remain. The trial judge refused

POOF!/SLAPP: Trial Court Erred In Awarding Fees To SLAPP Winner After Determining It Lacked Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over The Case

Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

August 22, 2013

$2,575.04 Fee Award to State Bar Went Away. Barry v. The State Bar of California, Case No. B242054 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 21, 2013) (published) involved an attorney who challenged a stipulation she reached with the State Bar resolving two disciplinary cases against her. She filed a civil action seeking to set

SLAPP: Plaintiff Successfully Fighting Off SLAPP Motion Not Entitled To Fee Recovery Against Defense

Cases: SLAPP

August 8, 2013

“Public Interest” Argument by Defense Was Not Frivolous. In Albanese v. Menounos, Case No. B240866 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 7, 2013) (published), plaintiff defeated a defense SLAPP motion on the basis no public interest was involved. Although the determination was affirmed on appeal, plaintiff requested fees from the appellate court because the

SLAPP: $30,889 SLAPP Winner Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: SLAPP

August 7, 2013

SLAPP Work Benefiting Non-Attorney and Attorney Defendants Was Okay, As Long As a True “Co-Benefit.” In Klinger v. Alderete, Case No. B245403 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 6, 2013) (unpublished), both non-attorney and attorney parties obtained a SLAPP dismissal of a malicious prosecution action. Then, all of the winning defendants were awarded attorney’s