Cases: SLAPP

Family Law/SLAPP: Fourth District, Division 3 Give Us a Two-Fer

Cases: Family Law, Cases: SLAPP

  Family Code Section 271 Sanctioning Authority Justified $3,000 Fee Award Against Ex-Wife.      Acting Justice Bedsworth, on behalf of a 3-0 panel, affirmed a $3,000 award against ex-wife based on Family Code section 271. That section imposes a “minimum level of professionalism and cooperation” to effectuate settlement in the family law area and authorizes […]

SLAPP: Texas Recently Enacts SLAPP Statute Similar to California’s Statute, With Similar Fee Shifting Provisions

Cases: SLAPP, Legislation

  U.S. Congress and North Carolina Also Considering SLAPP Legislation.      We have posted frequently on California’s anti-SLAPP statute and its fee-shifting provisions.       We can now report that, according to a June 20, 2011 post on the Reporters Committee for Freedom of Press News website, Texas is the 27th state, along with the District

SLAPP: Trope Limitation Prevents Winning Law Firm And Its Partners From Recouping Fees Spent In Successful Appeal

Cases: SLAPP

  Use of Associate For Appellate Work Was Tantamount to “Lost Opportunity Costs” Not Allowable under Trope.      We have done numerous posts on the Trope limitation which prevents in pro per attorneys representing themselves from obtaining attorney’s fees recovery under various fee-shifting statutes or contractual clauses. Now, Justice Mosk of the Second District, Division

SLAPP: Fee Awards–Substantially Reduced From Fee Requests–Are Affirmed

Cases: SLAPP

Second District, Division 1 Finds No Abuse of Discretion in Awarding Reduced Fees to Winning Defendants.      Here is a case that demonstrates that the mandatory fee awards awardable to defendants under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c)(1) are hinged on reasonable fees, with trial courts not having to rubberstamp fee requests that are too

SLAPP/POOF!: Reversal Of SLAPP Ruling Means Defendants’ Fee/Costs Award Went POOF!

Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

  $28,712.50 Fee/Costs Award Was the Victim in This One.      Defendants probably felt pretty good after they SLAPPed plaintiff’s suit and won fees/cost of $28,712.50 under the SLAPP mandatory fee-shifting statute. The feeling was somewhat short lived, however.      The appellate court in Gonzales v. Gonzales Foundation, Case Nos. A123857/124346 (1st Dist., Div. 3

SLAPP: Fee Recovery Was Proper, Not Barred By The Noerr-Pennington Doctrine

Cases: SLAPP

  $125,491.81 Fee Award Against Plaintiff Sustained on Appeal.      Plaintiff, after being hit with an adverse $125,491.81 fee award after losing a SLAPP motion, challenged the fee award in Ruttlen v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. B223345 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 30, 2011) (unpublished). Her challenge was that the award was unconstitutional

Scroll to Top