Billing Records Are Not Required Substantiation in a Fee Petition. In U.S. Bancorp Equipment Finance Inc. v. McFetters, Case Nos. G041929/G042094 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 3, 2010) (unpublished), defendants SLAPPed 9 out of 10 claims and were awarded attorney’s fees against losing plaintiff. The defense substantiated the fees by submitting attorney declarations describing […]
Contingency Fee Arrangement Did Lead to a Fee Multiplier in SLAPP Award. In Rapp v. Geagan, Case No. A126121 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 29, 2010) (unpublished), defendants prevailed on a SLAPP motion. The wrinkle is that they were represented by a defense attorney hired on a contingency fee basis, with the understanding he
Second District, Division 1 So Holds, After Split in Opinion By Two Unpublished Cases. In our June 19, 2008 post, we discussed Foster v. Warner, 2008 WL 2445106 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008), which held that the anti-SLAPP mandatory fee shifting provision (CCP § 425.16(c)(1), mandatory as to a prevailing defendant) does not authorize an
First District, Division 2 So Rules in Lengthy Unpublished Decision. Soderling v. Office of the California Attorney General, Case Nos. A124196/A124931 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 22, 2010) (unpublished) concerned an appeal by a doctor suing to overturn the trial court’s partial grant of an anti-SLAPP motion against the California Attorney General (AG) as
Fourth District, Division 3 Disagrees that A Noticed Motion for Fees Was the Exclusive Method for Fee Recovery. Here is a SLAPP fee procedural issue that we believe is certain to reoccur in some future cases where SLAPP defendants prevail on a SLAPP motion. Hong v. Regents of the University of California,
Fourth District, Division 3 Disagrees with Dicta in Doe v. Luster. You know that this one was going to be interesting when Justice Moore, on behalf of a 3-0 panel of the Fourth District, Division Three, wrote: “This is one of the weakest anti-SLAPP motions this court has reviewed in some time, which is
Declaratory Relief Action Denial Reversed re Class Action Fee Distribution. In Carder v. Patten, Faith & Sandford, Case No. B221940 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Oct. 12, 2010) (certified for publication), the appellate court reversed judgment entered against a plaintiff class action lawyer in a declaratory relief action he brought against other class action co-counsel
Mr. Francis Ordered to Pay $36,000 in Fees as SLAPP Loser. Los Angeles County Superior Court Mark Mooney threw out Girls Gone Wild CEO Joe Francis‘ defamation suit against Playboy Playmate of the Year Jayde Nicole pursuant to an anti-SLAPP motion. The suit stemmed from a fight at a West Hollywood nightclub last year.
However, Time For Filing Fee Motion Does Not Run Until Entry of Judgment Concluding Entire Action. The next one is a case involving an appeal from a SLAPP grant by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Terry A. Green, who co-contributor Mike has had the pleasure of appearing before in a wage/hour case.
Fourth District, Division 3 Finds Fee Motion Was Timely and Awarded Fees Were Not Too High. In Mallard v. Progressive Choice Ins. Co., Case Nos. G042527/G042710 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 15, 2010) (certified for publication), defendant (an insurance company’s litigation attorney) won a SLAPP motion and was awarded fees of $13,756.64 under the
