Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Sanctions, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Prevailing CPRA Petitioner Properly Denied Fees Under Mandatory Fee-Shifting Statute And Under Code Civ. Proc. Section 128.5 Based On Her Self-Represented Status

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Prevailing Petitioner Was Not Represented By Legal Counsel And Did Not Incur Or Become Liable For Attorney Fees.             In Drevaleva v. Alameda Health Sytem, Case No. A158282 (1st Dist., Div. 4 May 29, 2020) (unpublished), the trial court denied prevailing CPRA (California Public Records Act) petitioner’s requests for attorney’s fees, under Gov. […]

Costs, Special Fee Shifting Statute: Governmental Entity Could Not Charge Redaction Expenses As “Data Extraction” Costs Under The Public Records Act

Cases: Costs, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Two Provisions Had To Be Harmonized To Get To The Holding.             In National Lawyers Guild v. City of Hayward, Case No. S252445 (Cal. Supreme Court May 28, 2020) (published), the California Supreme Court decided that City was not allowed to charge a Public Records Act requestor the expenses of redacting statutorily-exempt information because those

Construction, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Contract Between The Parties Not Required For Awarded Code Civ. Proc. § 1032 Fees Of $2,114,434 And Costs Of $104,498 Against Real Estate Agent Defendant For Violations Of Bus. & Prof. Code § 7160

Cases: Construction, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Defendant Had Fraudulently Induced Plaintiff To Enter Into Contract With Defendant’s Associates For Home Renovation Work.             Bus. & Prof. Code § 7160 allows for an award of reasonable attorney’s fees, in addition to penalties and damages, to “[a]ny person who is induced to contract for a work of improvement, including but not limited

Employment, Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Undertaking: 1/4 DCA Affirms Labor Code § 98.2 Attorney Fees Award In Favor Of Employees Retaining Labor Commissioner’s Award After Employer’s Notice Of Appeal Dismissed

Cases: Employment, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Undertaking

Appeal To Superior Court Of Labor Commissioner’s Ruling Was Dismissed For Employer’s Failure To Post The Required Undertaking Or Otherwise Obtain A Waiver Of Same.             Labor Code section 98.2(c) provides for costs and reasonable attorney’s fees against the unsuccessful party appealing a decision of the Labor Commissioner to the superior court.  Rather than

Celebrities, Prevailing Party, Special Fee Shifting Statute: Nevada Supreme Court Adopts “Catalyst Theory” For Purposes Of Awarding Attorney’s Fees And Costs Under The Nevada Public Records Act

Cases: Celebrities, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Public Records Request Related To Las Vegas Murder Of American Rap Artist Tupac Shakur; California, Too, Has Adopted This Theory Under The California Public Records Act.             In Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Dept. v. The Center for Investigative Reporting, Inc., No. 77617, 136 Nev. Advance Opinion 15 (Nev. Sup. Ct. Apr. 2, 2020), the Nevada

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Elder Abuse Fee-Shifting Provision For Financial Abuse Applies If Liability Found Even If No Damages Ultimately Awarded

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Plaintiff Did Recover Damages For Elder Abuse Neglect, Such That Jury Likely Did Not Award “Double Damages” In Any Event On The Financial Abuse Claim.             In Arace v. Medico Investments, LLC, Case No. E071194 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 24, 2020) (unpublished), plaintiff, as personal representative for an elder, sued a senior residential care

Allocation, Section 1717, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Denial of Section 1717 Fees To Prevailing Defendants/Cross-Complainants Affirmed, But Reversed As To Denial Of Code Civ. Proc. Section 1021.9 Fees

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Defendants/Cross-Complainants Were Entitled To Statutory Section 1021.9 Fees After Prevailing On Trespassing Claims.             In Kelly v. Gregory House, Case Nos. A153735 and A153184 (1st Dist., Div. 1 March 23, 2020) (unpublished), Defendants/Cross-Complainants own and operate a 40-acre organic farm, and had leased 35 additional acres from an adjacent neighbor in order to expand

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Attorney General Winning Charitable Trust Fiduciary Breach Action Was Entitled To Recovery Of $1,654,083.65 In Attorney’s Fees And Costs Against Trustee

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Government Code Section 12598(b) Is Fee Entitlement Provision, With No Need To Gauge Success With Respect To Recovery.             Government Code section 12598(b) allows the California Attorney General to recover (mandatory) from defendants named in a charitable trust enforcement action all reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in conducting the action, with some discretion allowed

Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Unlicensed Contractors: $4 Million Fee Award Evaporates On Appeal Because Penal Code Section 496(B) Does Not Encompass Fraudulent Diversion Of Business Funds

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Unlicensed Contractors

Also, CCP § 1029.8 Did Not Apply, Because Defendants Were Neither Unlicensed Contractors Nor Broker-Dealers.             Appellate practice can result in a reversal of fortunes.  In Siry Investment, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour, Case No. B277750 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 3, 2020) (lead case, published), a $4 million-plus fee award based upon Penal Code section 496(b)

Scroll to Top