Cases: SLAPP

SLAPP: Individual Attorney, Claiming To Be In-House With Other Defendant Firms But Protecting His Interest in Other Firms, Not Entitled To Fee Recovery Under SLAPP Fee-Shifting Statute

Cases: SLAPP

Second District, Division 4 Agrees that Attorney Representing His Own Interests Cannot Recoup SLAPP Fees.      Attorneys representing themselves in successful anti-SLAPP motions are not entitled to recover attorney’s fees because there are no attorney-client relationships that lead to the attorney paying or becoming liable to pay in consideration for the legal representation. (Taheri Law […]

SLAPP: Reversal of SLAPP Grant On Two Out Of Four Claims Required Reconsideration of Fee Award

Cases: SLAPP

First District, Division 1 Does Reject That Insurance Defense Counsel Cannot Seek Fee Recovery.      In Roeder v. Gardner, Case No. A123864 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 22, 2010) (unpublished), defendant—through insurance defense counsel—obtained an anti-SLAPP strike of four causes of action out of eight. The trial court awarded $9,325 in mandatory attorney’s fees and

SLAPP: $24,442.50 Fee Award To City Of Pico Rivera Goes POOF Upon Reversal of SLAPP Grant

Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

Second District, Division 1 Rules Plaintiff’s Mandate Challenge to Compel City To Award a Contract Through Competitive Bidding Not Subject to anti-SLAPP Statute.      City of Pico Rivera likely felt pretty good after SLAPPing a plaintiff business’s mandate challenge to City’s invalidation of a contract with plaintiff and reentry into a contract with one of

SLAPP: Employee Attorney Representing Victorious Counsel In SLAPP Win On One Claim Was Allowed Prevailing Defendant Fee Recompense

Cases: SLAPP

Trope Prohibition Did Not Apply.       Trope v. Katz, 11 Cal.4th 274, 292 (1995) can strike fears into the heart of litigators winning hard fought battles for their own interests—it held that a law firm that is represented in litigation by its member attorneys cannot recover attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717. Trope has

Marc And Mike’s Top Twenty Decisions For 2009

Cases: Bankruptcy Efforts, Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Family Law, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Probate, Cases: Sanctions, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Social Security, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Part 1 of 2: First Ten Grouping—Nos. 11-20.      As noted in an earlier post, we have accumulated our “top 20” attorney’s fees decisions, recognizing that we limit the list to published decisions and that the order reflects nothing about the importance of the decision. Rather, we try to survey decisions of interest in different

SLAPP: Reversal Of Denial Of SLAPP Motions Means Plaintiff’s Fee Award Goes POOF! Too

Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

First District, Division 3 Reverses Fee Award.      As we have seen in cases reviewed in our category “SLAPP,” prevailing defendants on SLAPP motions are entitled to mandatory reasonable attorney’s fees. However, plaintiffs can get them if the court finds that the defendant’s SLAPP motion was frivolous or intended for dilatory purposes. Code Civ. Proc.,

SLAPP/Malicious Prosection Damages Interplay: SLAPP Fee Ruling Is Not Collateral Estoppel On Awarding Special Damages In Subsequent Malicious Prosecution Case

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fees as Damages, Cases: SLAPP

Second District Determines SLAPP Ruling Does Determine Amount of Motion to Strike Fees, But Remaining Attorney’s Fees Are Fair Game and Defendant Bears Burden of Allocating Out Unreasonable Fees. The next decision is an interesting one that we predict will have more and more play as SLAPP motions and later malicious prosecution awards interact in

SLAPP: $45,434 Attorney’s Fees Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: SLAPP

Trial Court Reduced Fee Request By $31,000.      In our category “SLAPP,” we have reviewed many decision awarding mandatory attorney’s fees to defendants prevailing in SLAPP proceedings. (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16(c).)      Here is one where substantial fees were awarded, even though substantial fees were reduced from the requested amount.      Winning defendants in

SLAPP: Trial Courts Have Discretion To Award Fees In Anti-SLAPP Proceeding Where Plaintiff Dismisses Without Prejudice … Especially Where The Result Is Not “Inevitable”

Cases: SLAPP

Second District, Division 3 Allows Dismissal of Action, But Does Not Prevent Trial Court From Considering Defense Request for Fees.      This next case is an interesting one and may not be the favorite of defendants bringing anti-SLAPP motions (and hoping to recoup attorney’s fees as the eventual prevailing party). It considers the impact of

SLAPP: Anti-SLAPP Fee Award Of $50,711.31 Sustained On Appeal

Cases: SLAPP

  Second District, Division 3 Does Split on Merits Affirmance.      In our category “SLAPP,” we have surveyed many California decisions involving appeal of mandatory fee-shifting awards in favor of prevailing defendants in anti-SLAPP proceedings. Both the fee requests and eventual awards can be sizable in nature, although lower courts frequently award much less than

Scroll to Top