In Mendoza v. Hamzeh, Case No. 239245 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 22, 2013) (partially published, fee discussion not published), a defendant attorney lost a SLAPP motion, which usually does not result in an adverse fee award unless the SLAPP motion was frivolous. Both the lower and appellate courts determined that the […]
Defendants won a SLAPP motion and were awarded partial fees under the mandatory fee-shifting statute, although some in pro per attorneys were denied some fees under Trope. So, the other side appealed, mainly contending that the fees/costs motions were untimely. Appealing party was not successful in Zhang v. Sugars, Case No. B243152
$20.055 SLAPP Fee/Costs Recovery Affirmed, Plus Appellants Get Hit With Appellate Sanctions Of Over $61,200 For Bringing Frivolous Appeal This next case reminds us that you need to give up after you or your client is on a losing string, especially once a couple of appeals tend to establish an adverse trend. Appealing
Marathon Funding, LLC v. Paramount Pictures, Case No. B240723 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Mar. 4, 2013) (Unpublished). In this first one, defendant won more than $690,548.90 in posttrial attorney’s fees under an investment agreement providing fees to the winner “in any action, suit, or other proceeding [that] is instituted concerning or arising out
In De Haas v. Shahinian, Case No. B234726 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Feb. 19, 2013) (unpublished), certain parties winning a SLAPP motion and subsequent mandatory fees of $35,559 were disappointed on appeal when the appellate court reversed the SLAPP grant. That meant the fees, as well, went POOF! for these parties. (Panakosta Partners,
Also, Denial of Fee Award to Prevailing Defendant Under FEHA Action Also Established Probable Cause, Dispensing of Malicious Prosecution Element. Central Escrow, Inc. v. Martin, Case No. B234166 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Feb. 5, 2013) (unpublished) was a malicious prosecution case brought against plaintiffs and their attorneys after they lost a sexual harassment
No “Complete” Frivolousness Shown. Defendant losing a SLAPP motion was hit with attorney’s fees of $19,500 for filing a completely frivolous proceeding in Hayes v. Hutchison, Case No. B237556 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 24, 2013) (unpublished). A frivolous defense motion can be the subject of fee recovery in the SLAPP area under
Later Order Fixing Fees Allowed Appellate Jurisdiction on the Merits; However, Detailed Billing Records Were Not Needed to Substantiate Fee Request. In Susott v. Auld-Susott, Case No. H037066 (Jan. 3, 2013) (unpublished), plaintiff lost a SLAPP motion and the trial court awarded defendant $20,000 in mandatory fees out of a requested $31,976.74. Plaintiff
Case Did Not Involve Brown Act Open Meeting Issues, So Fee Grant Did Not Fall Within Narrow Exemption. Here is a wild one, at least the facts. The grant of fees to the prevailing SLAPP defendant was another matter, an award affirmed by the appellate court in Tri-City Healthcare District v. Sterling, Case
Appellate Court Refused to Inject Civil Rights Fee “Frivolity” Standards Into SLAPP Mandatory Fee Recovery Statute. In Williams v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. B234100 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Nov. 8, 2012) (unpublished), plaintiff was hit with post-appeal SLAPP fees of over $40,000 when defendants successfully defended a SLAPP grant in a
