Cases: SLAPP

Appealability/SLAPP: Denial Of Slapp Fees To Plaintiff Shows Dual Standard of Review Governing Recovery In This Area

Cases: Appealability, Cases: SLAPP

Must Show Objective Speciousness and Subjective Bad Faith. ​Young v. Tri-City Healthcare Dist., Case No. D063980 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 15, 2014) (unpublished) contains a good discussion of the review standard applicable to a lower court ruling denying attorney’s fees to a prevailing SLAPP plaintiff under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c)(1). ​In this […]

SLAPP/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Attorney Declaration Without Detailed Billings Can Support Fee Award In California State Courts

Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  $22,597.50 SLAPP Fee Award Based On Litigation Privileged Affirmed On Appeal.      In Christiana v. Plotkin, Case No. B244862 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 27, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiff (former defendant in a criminal action) sued defendant psychiatrist who issued a report he did not like on his competency to stand trial/assist his appointed public

IP/POOF!/SLAPP: A SLAPP Fee Award And Copyright Claim Dismissal Fee Recovery Go POOF!, While Another SLAPP Fee Award Of $248,506 Plus Fees On Fees Affirmed

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

Appealing Parties Could Not Surmount Abuse of Discretion Standard on Second SLAPP Fee Award.      In Graham-Sult v. Clainos, Case No. 11-16779 (9th Cir. Feb. 5, 2014) (published), one defendants obtained a SLAPP fee recovery of $126,431.50 (out of a requested $133,431.50) and a second group of defendants obtained a SLAPP fee recovery of $248,506

SLAPP: Appellate Court Determined Libel Count Was Meritorious, Requiring Lower Court To Entertain Opposing Parties’ SLAPP Fee Request

Cases: SLAPP

  Lower Court Erred in Deciding SLAPP Motion Lacked Merit.      In Monarch Consulting, Inc. v. Zamora, Case No. B244791 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Jan. 31, 2014) (unpublished), cross-complainant ex-employee countersued cross-defendants ex-employer/employer’s CEO for libel, triggering a SLAPP motion by cross-defendants. Before the hearing, ex-employee filed a nonopposition and dismissed the libel count. However,

SLAPP: Fourth District, Division One Decides Lower Trial Court Must Determine If Defendant Would Have Prevailed On The Merits Under SLAPP Statute Where Plaintiff Voluntarily Dismisses for Purposes of SLAPP Fee Recovery

Cases: SLAPP

  4/1 DCA Notes Split in Opinion; We Predict This One May Be Accepted For Review.      Tourgeman v. Nelson v. Kennard, Case No. D063473 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 16, 2004) (published) dealt with a SLAPP fee recovery issue which has engendered a split in intermediate appellate thinking, which may (as best as we

Costs/SLAPP: Plaintiffs Ultimately Losing Against Defendants Did Not Defeat Defense Argument That Defendants Were Routine Costs “Prevailing Parties” Even Though Plaintiffs Won Fees/Costs On Prior Anti-SLAPP Motion

Cases: Costs, Cases: SLAPP

  No Real Case Law on the Precise Issue, But Result is Logical to Appellate Court.      Personalized Workout of La Jolla, Inc. v. Ravet, Case No. D061647 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 14, 2014) (unpublished) dealt with an interesting issue—whether plaintiffs winning fees/costs in a prior SLAPP proceeding were the parties with a “net

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

Cases: Billing Record Substantiation, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  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

  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

  $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

Scroll to Top