Given The Enormous Successful By The Defense On The SLAPP Motion, No Need To Reverse The Fees Award On Appeal. Many practitioners are familiar with the general principle that the reversal of a merits judgment many times will result in reversal of a fees award, because the degree of success needs to be figured […]
The Fee Award Was In An Unspecified, Reduced Amount. Helix Media LLC v. Clark, Case No. B332861 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 23, 2025) (unpublished) reminds plaintiffs to be prudent in bringing SLAPP motions; plaintiff in the case had a SLAPP motion declared frivolous, resulting in a reduced attorney’s fees award of $81,193.45.
Prevailing Party Had The Right To Have A Hearing On The Fee Motion, With The Other Side Reserving Its Objections To Fee Recovery. In Ruano v. Goldberg, Case No. B326833 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 21, 2025) (unpublished), a defendant prevailed on a SLAPP motion and then moved separately for fees. The lower court
Appeal Was Dismissed. The defense in Ali v. Dignity Health, Case No. B331058 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Dec. 31, 2024) (unpublished) won some aspects of a SLAPP motion and was granted some mandatory fees, but the defense appealed and claimed that the SLAPP motion should have been granted in entirety and more fees awarded.
Also, Trial Judge Did Reduce The $23,650 Fee Ask Down To $14,850. Plaintiff lost a defamation action based on defendant’s successful anti-SLAPP motion, with the lower court awarding mandatory fees of $14,850 (which was lower than the $23,650 “ask” of the defendant). The award was affirmed on appeal in Tye v. Papp, Case No.
Winning Defendant Did Something Smart: After SLAPP Motion Granted, Offered To Stipulate To A Much Lower Fees And Costs Award, Rejected By Plaintiff. When it comes to the reasonableness of a fee award, we have posted on situations where the prevailing party offered to stipulate to a lower fees/costs award and then obtained a
Everyone Gets To Keeping Litigating! In Sayarad v. Butler-Lopez, Case No. A166884 (1st Dist., Div. 1 May 6, 2024) (unpublished), plaintiff suffered a partial grant of a SLAPP motion, resulting in an adverse attorney’s fees award as to one defendant of $42,031.50, and with the lower court denying plaintiff’s motion for sanctions based on
Renewed Fee Motion Was Timely, Where Original Fee Motion Was Filed Within Deadlines. In Shih v. Max, Case No. B324437 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 29, 2024) (unpublished), lower court denied two defendants’ SLAPP fee motions as moot after plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their complaint before the SLAPP motion could be heard, although there were
Plaintiff’s Appeal Of The Later Judgment Incorporating Fees Was Appealable, But Lower Court’s $62,500 Fee Award Was No Abuse Of Discretion. In Norman v. Ross, Case Nos. B316971 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 4 Apr. 23, 2024) (partially published; fee discussion not published), three defendants won a SLAPP motion on plaintiff’s claims, while two
Opinion Validates Our Recommendation In Many Posts To Separately Appeal An Adverse Fee Order Or Appeal Both Rulings In A Combined Appeal If Possible. In Williams v. Doctors Med. Center of Modesto, Inc., Case Nos. F084700 et al. (5th Dist. Mar. 27, 2024) (published), plaintiff separately appealed the granting of a SLAPP motion and
