Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Post-Judgment Enforcement and Fraudulent Conveyance: Fees Are Awardable Based On Jury Determination That Parties Conspired/Aided and Abetted In Efforts To Avoid Enforcement of Judgment Against Predecessor

Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District, Division 7 Also Decides That Alter Ego Should Have Been Added As a Defendant For Purposes of Exposure to Anti-SLAPP Fees.      The next case shows that appellate courts will reinstate fee exposure where they are convinced that a party was part and parcel of a scheme to evade a judgment or was […]

Contempt Attorney’s Fees Under Code Of Civil Procedure Section 1218(a) Are Vacated Based On Failure To Apportion And On Due Process Grounds

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

  Fourth District, Division 3 Also Finds That Fee Clarifying Substantiation in Reply Brief Was Too Late Unless Opponent Given Opportunity for Further Response.      Code of Civil Procedure section 1218(a) provides for attorney’s fees to “the party initiating the contempt” for fees which that party incurred “in connection with the contempt proceeding.” It is

Winning County Teacher’s Challenge To $180,000 Fee Award Under Education Code Section 44944(e)(2) Affirmed

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

Second District, Division Two Finds No Abuse of Discretion in Not Awarding $300,670 in Attorney’s Fees to Winning Teacher.      The next case concerns a statutory fee-shifting statute—Education Code section 44944(e)(2). It also is an interesting illustration of how appellate courts vary in finding whether a lower court should have articulated the basis for its

FEHA: 25% Of Requested Fees Awarded Based On Apportionment

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District, Division 3 Sustains Application of Negative Multiplier Based on Plaintiff Prevailing On Only One of Four Claims.      The California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Government Code section 12900 et seq. (FEHA), has a mandatory fee-shifting provision for prevailing plaintiffs. (Gov. Code, sec. 12965(b).) Nonetheless, it is tempered by mandating only awards of

Harassment Prohibition Orders: Attorney’s Fees Awarded To Winning Defendant

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  CCP Section 527.6(i) “Prevailing Party” Language Is Broad, Rules the First District.      Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6(i) authorizes a discretionary award of attorney’s fees and court costs to the prevailing party in an action to obtain a TRO or preliminary injunction prohibiting harassment. The First District, Division 5 rebuffed a losing litigant’s

Another POOF!: Defendants’ $55,000 Fees/Costs Award Goes Away When Court of Appeal Reverses Summary Judgment In Landlord-Tenant Lawsuit

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Reversal Means Award Goes POOF!      The POOF! principle got illustrated again, recently, in Spinks v. Equity Residential Briarwood Apartments, Case No. H031468 (6th Dist. Mar. 4, 2009) (certified for publication). There, landlords had obtained a summary judgment against tenant in a contentious landlord-tenant lawsuit after tenant’s employer terminated her and asked the landlord

Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act: Practitioners Should Get Higher Hourly Rates Based On Two Companion Ninth Circuit Decisions

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Federal Court of Appeals Determines That A Broader Relevant Market Study, Not Just Past LHWCA Awards, Is In Order.      The Ninth Circuit recently decided two decisions that will likely result in higher hourly rates in the lodestar analysis for practitioners submitting fee recovery requests in LHWCA cases, a result that follows from a past

Trade Secret Misappropriation: Sixth District Affirms $1,114,930 Attorney’s Fees Award To Defense For Bad Faith Trade Secret Misappropriation Claim

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Standard of Review, Cases: Trade Secrets

Court of Appeal Applies Gemini Bad Faith Test Under Civil Code Section 3426.4.      Civil Code section 3426.4 is a special fee-shifting provision in the trade secret misappropriation area. It authorizes a trial court to make a discretionary award of fees and costs to the prevailing party “if a claim of misappropriation is made in

Tree Injury: Successful Plaintiff Not Awarded Attorney’s Fees In Light Of Plaintiff’s Recovery Of Doubling “Penalty”

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Fourth District, Division 1 Affirms Trial Court’s Discretionary Refusal to Award Fees.       Trees seem to be a popular subject of dispute between neighbors, either because they are destroyed as part of new construction or because they block scenic views of the ocean/nearby canyons. There are some special penalty and fee-shifting provisions relating to

Scroll to Top