Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

California Public Records Act: Unpublished Decision Reviewed On Our October 1, 2008 Post Is Certified For Publication

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

California Public Records Act: Unpublished Decision Reviewed On Our October 1, 2008 Post Is Certified For Publication Sixth District Certifies Bernardi v. County of Monterey For Publication.      On October 1, 2008, we posted a review of Bernardi v. County of Monterey, Case No. H031648 (6th Dist. Sept. 30, 2008). We indicated that this case […]

Brown Act And California Public Records Act: Court Of Appeal Reverses Trial Court Denial Of Attorney’s Fees In Published Decision

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Fifth District Determines Plaintiff Did Prevail Under Public Records Act in Establishing Denial of Access to All Local Agency Documents.      The case we next review is important to all practitioners (most likely public interest or land use attorneys) seeking to make sure there is transparency in the government decision making process or there is

CEQA Attorney’s Fees Award Reversed Because Petitioners Did Substantially Comply With Providing Notice Of Expedited Hearing Date

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First District, Division Four Faces Novel Issue, Overturning Fee Award Against Petitioners.      Now we look at an interesting decision for CEQA practitioners.      Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.), a petitioner must request a hearing within 90 days of filing the petition or be subject to

Brother Losing Wrongful Death/Survival Action Tagged With Over $250,000 In Attorney’s Fees On Various Grounds

Cases: Section 998, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Appellate Court Sustains Fee Award Based on Unruh Act and CCP section 998; CCP section 1026(b) Did Not Bar Imposition of Fees               Civil cases are very interesting affairs, with attorney’s fees awards based many times on variant statutory provisions.  Justice Moore, of our local Fourth District, Division 3, was the author

Defendant Given Relief From Default Judgment Properly Assessed With Payment Of $8,000 Of Attorney’s Fees And Costs As A Condition Of Relief

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Court of Appeal Observes that $1,000 Monetary “Cap” in CCP section 473 Only Applies to 473 Awardable Sanctions.             Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) authorizes a trial court to relieve a party from judgment taken against him/her through mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.  The court has discretion to allow relief

Sixth District Affirms Attorney’s Fees Award of $244,287.50 Against Monterey County Under the California Public Records Act

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

Unpublished Decision Nicely Surveys Such Topics As Standard of Review, Lodestar, and Multiplier Principles.             In our June 30, 2008 post, we discussed a Shasta County Superior Court’s award of attorney’s fees against the City of Redding under the California Public Records Act (CPRA).  Government Code section 6259(d) provides for a mandatory

Elder Financial Abuse Attorney’s Fees Award Affirmed Against Attorney With Undisclosed Conflict of Interest

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District, Division Six Sustains Award under Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.5.             Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.5(a) provides for an award of costs and reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing plaintiff where the defendant has been found liable for financial elder abuse under section 15610.30.            

Mobile Homeowners Awarded $350,000 Attorney’s Fees Under The San Rafael Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Ordinance

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Court of Appeal Also Determines that Settlement Ambiguity Allows Homeowners An Opportunity to Seek More Fees for Sustaining Result on Appeal.             A mobilehome park owner increased rent to homeowners in the mobilehome park to recoup the costs of capital expenditures.  Following an arbitration, settlement, and lawsuit alleging noncompliance with the arbitration

First District Vacates Attorney’s Fees and Expert Fees Awarded Against School District

Cases: Section 998, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Appellate Panel Finds No Basis for Fee Award Because District Did Not Violate “Prompt Payment” Penalty Statute.             Public Contract Code section 7107 is a “prompt payment” statute specifying consequences for a public agency that withholds retention proceeds from a general contractor.  It basically provides that a public agency may withhold from

Scroll to Top