Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Lodestar/Special Fee Shifting Statute: Lodestar, Not Cost-Plus Method, Governs Fee Recovery Under Special Red Light Abatement Fee Shifting Statute

Cases: Costs, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  First District, Division 4 Finds McCullough Reasoning Inapt; Also Refuses to Upset Cost Award to City in Separate Appeal.      In City of Santa Rosa v. Patel, Case Nos. A124199/A124452 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Dec. 21, 2010) (certified for publication), City of Santa Rosa prevailed in a red light abatement action and was awarded […]

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Defendant Losing Civil Embezzlement Case, Who Later Pleads No Contest In Criminal Case, Ordered To Make $122,225 In Restitution To Former Employer

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

$77,750 of Restitution Order Consisted of Attorney’s Fees.      Penal Code section 1202.4(f) is a very specialized fee-shifting statute under which a trial court in a criminal case can order a defendant to reimburse a third party for costs incurred in proving the criminal act (such as reimbursing a former employer for fees and costs

Special Fee Shifting Statutes: CCP § 1038 Whacks Losing Litigant With Defense Costs Of $67,644.30 In Favor Of City Of Fullerton

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Fourth District, Division Sustains Finding That Suit Was Unmeritorious, Frivolous Litigation.      Code of Civil Procedure section 1038 is a potent fee-shifting statute allowing public entities a way to recover the costs of defending against unmeritorious and frivolous litigation. (Kobzoff v. Los Angeles County Harbor/UCLA Medical Center, 19 Cal.4th 851, 857 (1998).) In relevant

SLAPP: Attorney’s Fees Awards Under SLAPP And Harassment Injunction Statute Affirmed

Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Challenging Plaintiff Did Not Show Specificity in Padding, Duplication, or Unrelatedness Arguments To Support Fee Reduction.      To our dear readers after Thanksgiving, here is a case with excellent reminders about steps you should take when challenging lower court fee awards. Make sure that you make specific challenges, not just arguments, supported with declarations from

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Seventh Circuit Court Of Appeals Formulates Definition of “Exceptional Cases” Predicate For Awarding Attorney’s Fees Under The Lanham Act

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Circuit Judge Posner Tackles the Jumble of Standards Utilized by Federal Circuit Courts.      For those readers who practice intellectual property law (especially under the Lanham Act), we commend for reading Circuit Judge Posner’s recent decision in Nightingale Home Healthcare, Inc. v. Anodyne Therapy, __ F.3d __, 2010 WL 4721581 (7th Cir. Nov. 23, 2010).

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Newspaper Petitioner Gaining Redacted And Then Unredacrted Documents Under California Public Records Act Denied Fee Award

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Third District Finds Good Faith of Agency in Releasing Redacted Documents Expeditiously Militated Against Award.      California Public Records Act, Government Code section 6259, mandates attorney’s fees to a “prevailing” petitioner. However, even though the law is clear, the next case demonstrates that many (if not most) cases are factually dependent, with the circumstances

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Discretionary Harassment Restraining Order Grant Of Fee Recovery Reversed

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Winning Defendant Failed to Comply With Statutory Requirements for Claiming Fees.      Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6(i) certainly permits a trial court discretion to award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party when a civil harassment restraining order is sought. (Krug v. Maschmeier, 172 Cal.App.4th 796, 802-803 (2009).) However, a prevailing defendant must still follow

Special Fee Shifting Statute: Retained P.E. Teacher Had To Follow Normal Fee/Costs Procedures For Timely Claiming Costs Under Education Code Section 44944

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First District, Division 2 Upheld Trial Court Decision to Award Some Fees and Costs to Teacher, But Not All of Them.      Well, we report on all areas of the law. This one is a curious case, where a teacher untimely filed for fees and costs, but the trial court cut teacher a break and

ERISA And Routine Costs: District Judges Retain Discretion To Award Or Deny Costs To Prevailing ERISA Parties Under FRCP 54(d)(1)

Cases: Costs, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Ninth Circuit Remands For District Judge to Determine Whether Costs Should Be Awarded Under Rule 54(d)(1).      Resolving a split among federal district courts, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Quan v. Computer Sciences Corp., Case No. 09-56190 (9th Cir. Sept. 30, 2010) (for publication), decided that a prevailing party in an ERISA action

Substantiation Of Fees Under Special Fee-Shifting Statute: Court Of Appeal Overturns Trial Court’s Reconsideration Of Fees Request Where No Supporting Evidence Presented In Initial Fee Request Papers

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Third District Finds Reconsideration Was Erroneous and Finds No Basis for CCP § 473 Relief.      Here is a case that segues well with what we have advocated in many prior posts: when you prepare fee requests, make sure your papers provide the lower court with a roadmap, and a roadmap supported by competent evidence

Scroll to Top