Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Intervenor In PUC And Federal Court Proceedings Wins Grant Of Attorney’s Fees, But Not For Unsuccessful Subsequent Work Where It Took A 180 Degree Shift in Position That Was Unsuccessful

Cases: Intervenors, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District, Division Eight Affirms PUC’s Decision Denying Substantial Backend Fees and a Multiplier to Intervenor.             Because attorney’s fee issues are pervasive, we now have a post of interest to lawyers who practice before the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC).             The Utility Reform Network (TURN) intervened in […]

Nonvictorious Qui Tam Plaintiff Is Not Assessed With Requests For Admission Sanctions Or Attorney’s Fees For Bringing A Frivolous Action

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District So Rules Even Though Plaintiff Lost at the Demurrer Stage.             In State of California ex rel. Dockstader v. Amoroso Construction Co., Inc., Case No. B197343 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Aug. 26, 2008) (unpublished), a qui tam plaintiff lost a demurrer against some private defendants for reimbursement of costs relating

Reversals Of Two Judgments Result In Either Vacating Or Remand Of Fee Orders

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First and Fourth Districts Overturn Fee Awards After Reversal of Underlying Judgments.             Reversals of underlying judgments can also mean that attorney’s fees awards are vacated or remanded if properly appealed, as the next two cases illustrate.             The First District, Division Four, in Arntz Builders v. City of

Real Estate Brokerage Proprietor Who Ratified Employee Conduct Liable For Attorney’s Fees Under Elder Abuse Act Fee-Shifting Provision

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Probate, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Proprietor’s Ratification Triggered Fee Liability to Conservator When House Sold For Less Than Its Fair Market Value.             Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.5 has a mandatory fee-shifting provision that authorizes an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs (including conservator’s fees devoted to litigation) when a defendant is proven liable for

Conservatorship Attorney’s Fees: Comply With California Rules Of Court Or Suffer The Consequences

Cases: Cases Under Review, Cases: Probate, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District Awards About Only a Tenth of Requested Fees Based on Failure to Segregate Services and Comply With California Rules of Court.             Here is a new area that we have not yet addressed—attorney’s fees awarded in a conservatorship.  As in other substantive areas, it is necessary to provide proper substantiation

Party Losing Harassment Injunction May Have To Pay Fees To The Opponent, But Cannot Be Ordered to Pay Fees To Opponent’s Attorney

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District, Division Six Modifies Fee Award Made Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 527.6(i).             Where statutory directives are clear, a de novo issue of law is presented for the appellate court’s determination.  That was the situation in the next case we discuss.             Code of Civil

Interpleader Actions—Attorney’s Fees Do Not Have To Be Only Paid Out Of Interpleader Involving Deposited Cash

Cases: Interpleader, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District Does Place Restrictions On Activities For Which Neutral Stakeholder Can Seek Fee Reimbursement.              Code of Civil Procedure section 386.6(a) provides that a party to a properly commenced interpleader action “may insert is his motion, petition, complaint, or cross complaint a request for allowance of his costs and reasonable attorney

Can An Intervenor Be Liable for An Award of Attorney’s Fees?

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

Yes, With the Answer Depending on Whether the Fee Entitlement Statute Is Discretionary/Mandatory in Nature or Whether the Intervenor Is “Innocent.”             The Ninth Circuit recently explored the issue of when an intervenor may be held liable for an award of attorney’s fees and costs under two fee-shifting statutes, one arising under

Second District, Division 2 Joins Division 4 In Affirming Denial Of Attorney’s Fees To Successful FEHA Defendant Because Plaintiff’s Action Was Not Proven Frivolous In Nature

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

No Express Findings Are Required When Denying a Fee Award to a Winning FEHA Defendant.                                                                                                                       

Scroll to Top