That is the Good News … the Bad News is that They Have to Pay Plaintiff Directly. In our August 15, 2009 post, we looked at a companion case to the next one, where defendants lost an appeal of an award of attorney’s fees to plaintiffs when defendants were found to have brought […]
Fourth District, Division Two Sustains Awards in Favor of Plaintiff Defeating Frivolous Motion. In our category “SLAPP,” we have examined many cases where attorney’s fees have been awarded to defendants prevailing on anti-SLAPP motions. However, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c) also provides that a defendant losing an anti-SLAPP motion can suffer an adverse
Hefty SLAPP Fees Awarded to Victorious Cross-Defendant in Trade Secret Case. In our June 27, 2009 post, we reviewed the previously unpublished decision by the Fourth District, Division 3 in Raining Data Corp. v. Barrenechea. This decision was certified for publication on July 21, 2009. Raining Data affirmed a $112,353.35 attorney’s fees award
First District, Division 5 So Holds in City of Pleasanton Referendum Dispute. We have to say that defendant victors—even partial victors—are usually awarded some amount of fees for winning anti-SLAPP motions, which carry a mandatory fee-shifting bias for defendant winners. (If you don’t believe this, see our category “SLAPP.”) The next case is but
Fourth District, Division 3 Finds No Abuse of Discretion. In Raining Data Corp. v. Barrenechea, Case No. G040902 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 26, 2009) (unpublished), plaintiff lost a SLAPP motion against a cross-defendant arising from a trade secret misappropriation dispute, with the trial court awarding $112, 353.75 to cross-defendant under Code of Civil
Second District, Division Eight Finds No Trope Prohibition on Fee Recovery. Witte v. Kaufman, 141 Cal.App.4th 1201, 1211 (2006) establishes that the law firm representing itself, with no attorney-client relationship, is not entitled to attorney’s fees for winning a SLAPP motion. This rule is based upon the holding in Trope v. Katz, 11 Cal.4th
Second District Issues Two Opinions With Very Different Lessons. Bier v. Grodsky & Olecki, Case No. B204887 (2d Dist., Div. 8 June 4, 2009) (Unpublished) In this one, plaintiff lost an anti-SLAPP motion striking numerous causes of action based on the absolute litigation privilege of Civil Code section 47 (a very potent basis for
Orange County Superior Court Judge Colaw So Rules. In our May 4, 2009 post, we discussed a fee battle brewing in Orange County Superior Court after St. James Church’s SLAPP motion eventually lost in a case against the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles. That battle has now taken place so that we can
$9,387.50 Appellate Fees Awardable After Appeal Court Dismisses Appeal Without Written Decision. Stevens v. Paul, Case No. A122993 (1st Dist., Div. 2 May 18, 2009) (unpublished) confronted an unusual procedural situation: plaintiff lost a SLAPP motion (hit with $5,155 in fees); appealed and lost in a summary non-written dismissal order; plaintiff was assessed further
Citizens Group Awarded Over $175,000 in Fees For Successful Attack of Santa Barbara Proposed Housing Project. Citizens Planning Association (CPA) were awarded over $175,000 in attorney’s fees ($117,228 lodestar, based on four attorneys charging $350 an hour, plus a $60,000 multiplier add-on) for successfully attacking the City of Santa Barbara’s environmental analysis of the
