Cases: SLAPP

Appealability, SLAPP: 2/7 DCA Affirms Its Conclusion In Earlier Published Opinion That Denial Of SLAPP Fees To Plaintiff After A Defense SLAPP Denial Is Not Immediately Appealable

Cases: Appealability, Cases: SLAPP

In Doing So, It Disagreed With Different Conclusions By Two Sister Appellate Courts.             Kaplan v. Davidson, Case No. B312826 (2d Dist., Div. 7 July 11, 2022) (unpublished) highlights a rift between this Division and other sister appellate courts on the question of whether denial of attorney’s fees to a plaintiff after a merits denial […]

Reviews: Articles On Anti-SLAPP Fee Awards And On Best Practices

Cases: SLAPP, Reviews

California Litigation Publishes Two Helpful Attorney Fees Articles In Latest Issue.         California Litigation, the journal of the Litigation Section of the California Lawyers Association, has published two articles relating to attorney fees in the latest issue, Vol. 35, No. 1 (2022). Co-contributor to this blog Marc is one of the editors of California Litigation.

SLAPP: Appellate Court’s Reversal Of SLAPP Denials Meant That Fee Denial Had To Be Reversed And Remanded For A Fee Determination

Cases: SLAPP

Even If Construed As A “Partial” SLAPPback, No Authority Cited To Preclude Fee Recovery.             In J.B.B. Investment Partners, Ltd. v. Fair, Case No. A160098 (1st Dist., Div. 2 June 9, 2022) (unpublished), defendant attorneys filed an anti-SLAPP motion which was granted on an abuse of process count and denied on other counts brought by

Deadlines, SLAPP: Successful SLAPPing Defendants’ Award Of $33,120 In Attorney Fees And $91.85 In Costs Reversed On Appeal Due To Trial Court’s Flawed Legal Analysis In Determining Deadline For Fees/Costs Motion

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: SLAPP

Holidays Did Not Stop The Clock On Defendants’ Deadline And Code Civ. Proc., § 664.5 Does Not Govern When The Clock Begins Under Rule 8.104.             In Tye v. Papp, Case No. E076523 (4th Dist., Div. 2 May 9, 2022) (unpublished), defendants were awarded $33,120 in attorney fees and $91.85 in costs under Code Civ.

SLAPP: Although Defendant’s SLAPP Motion Was Frivolous, $5,000 Fee Award Was Reversed As A Matter Of Law Because Plaintiff Law Firm Represented Itself In The SLAPP Proceedings

Cases: SLAPP

Self-Represented Attorney Cannot Get Sanctions For Frivolous SLAPP Motion.             In the SLAPP area, a trial judge can award fees as sanctions against a defendant which files a frivolous SLAPP motion.  That did occur in Stuart Kane LLP v. The Law Offices of J.D. Cuzzolina, Esq., Case No. G060172 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Apr.27, 2022)

SLAPP: Where In Pro Per Litigant Hired An Assisting Attorney To Help With A SLAPP Motion And Apportioned Requested Fees 50% To Reflect Winning On One Out Of Two Claims, Appellate Court Affirmed Trial Judge’s SLAPP Fee Award

Cases: SLAPP

A Little Over $38,000 Was The Final Fee Award.             Although an in pro per litigant cannot obtain a SLAPP fees award, he can get an award where he retains an attorney to assist him with prosecuting a SLAPP motion, even if the attorney is not of record.  (Witte v. Kaufman, 141 Cal.App.4th 1201, 1207

SLAPP: 2/5 CCA Affirms Order Granting Attorneys’ Anti-SLAPP Motion After Previous Attorney Sues New Attorneys For Advising Client Not To File Complaint Drafted By Previous Attorney

Cases: SLAPP

It's About The Attorneys Fees . . .          Attorney Richard Pech, in pro per, sued attorneys Stephen Doniger and Alan Burroughs, alleging that Doniger and Burroughs advised Pech's client not to file a complaint Pech drafted, thereby depriving Pech of the ability to collect attorney's fees. Defendants filed an anti-SLAPP motion and were able

Prevailing Party, SLAPP: 4/3 DCA Affirms Trial Court’s Determination That Cross-Defendants Achieving Partial Success On SLAPP Motion Were Prevailing Parties And Entitled To Attorney Fees.

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: SLAPP

Determination Of Prevailing Party Status In SLAPP Motion Lies Within The Broad Discretion Of The Trial Court, And Will Not Be Overturned Absent A Showing Of Abuse Of That Discretion.             In Harris v. Powerdrive Oil and Gas Company, Case No. G059623 (4th Dist., Div. 3 February 4, 2022) (unpublished), the trial court partially granted

SLAPP: 2/1 DCA Affirms $279,197.80 In SLAPP Fees Awarded To Defendant Who Ultimately Lost Lawsuit With A Jury Verdict Against Him In The Amount Of $3.5 Million

Cases: SLAPP

Practical Benefit Test Unnecessary Where Defendant Wholly Prevailed On Anti-SLAPP Motion And Was Entitled To Mandatory Fees.             In Baral v. Schnitt, Case No. B298050 (2d Dist., Div. 1 January 28, 2022) (unpublished), plaintiff – who had won a jury verdict against business partner defendant of $2.5 million in compensatory damages and $1 million in

Scroll to Top