Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Reversal and Remand of Damage Award Likely Means that Fee Award Under a 998 Offer Also Gets Reversed

Cases: Section 998, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Fourth District, Division One Does Just That In Consumer Legal Remedies Act/Song-Beverly Act Case.             The Song-Beverly Act, Civil Code section 1790 et seq., is a legislatively-crafted scheme to protect consumers buying certain personal goods from defects and providing replacement/repair directives under certain conditions.  Section 1794(d) of the Song-Beverly Act provides for […]

Lower Court Erroneously Awarded Default and Then Prevailing Party Status to Plaintiff Where Defendant Failed to Appear for Trial

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Fourth District, Division Three Reverses $2,700 Fee Award As Without Basis.             The next case arose from a rather bizarre set of facts, showing fee awards will be withheld if the fee is awarded as an unwarranted penalty in the guise of a statutory fee award.             This legal

SUCCESSFUL ANTI-SLAPP DEFENDANT CANNOT RECOVER ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR PREVAILING FROM “SLAPPED” PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY

Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First District So Holds In Unpublished Decision and Modifies Judgment So That Attorney Is Not Held Liable for Anti-SLAPP Fees.             Under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c), a prevailing defendant on an anti-SLAPP motion is entitled to recover attorney’s fees and costs.   This has been interpreted to mean the losing plaintiff

LIS PENDENS WITHDRAWAL—YOU STILL MIGHT GET AWARDED ATTORNEYS’ FEES SHORT OF AN EXPUNGEMENT

Cases: Lis Pendens, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Castro Holds That A Practical Prevailing Party Test Governs An Award of Fees When A Lis Pendens Is Withdrawn.         Code of Civil Procedure section 405.38 provides that the prevailing party on a motion to expunge a lis pendens is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in bringing or

LOSING PLAINTIFF IN DANGEROUS PUBLIC PROPERTY CASE DOES NOT SUFFER ADVERSE AWARD OF FEES UNDER THE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION “COST OF PROOF” SCHEME OR CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1038

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

Fourth District, Division Two Splits Sharply On Fee Award Denial By Lower Court .             Mr. Leviant, of The Complex Litigator, has done a very insightful synopsis of Laabs v. City of Victorville, Case No. E040778 (4th Dist., Div. 2 June 12, 2008) (certified for publication) on the subject of when “cost

ENFORCEMENT OF SETTLEMENT STIPULATION BASED ON STATUTORY LABOR VIOLATIONS REAPS FEE AWARD WHEN DEFENDANT DEFAULTS

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

Second District Finds That Settlement Stipulation Justified Fee Entitlement and Rejected Challenges to Substantiation of Claimed Fees.             A plaintiff enters into a settlement stipulation with defendant, agreeing only to waive fees and costs upon full payment.  Defendant does not pay.  Plaintiff obtains an order enforcing the settlement agreement payment terms and

ATTORNEYS DEFENSING LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM AT SUMMARY JUDGMENT STAGE AWARDED $80,962 IN “COST OF PROOF” FEES INCURRED IN PROVING FACTS IMPROPERLY DENIED IN THE REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION PROCESS

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

Second District Corrects Clerical Error and Affirms Substantial “Cost of Proof” Award Against Losing Attorney Malpractice Plaintiff.             In our June 6, 2008 post, we reviewed the fee-shifting provision of Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.430(a).  Briefly summarizing, that provision allows a trial court to award “costs of proof,” including reasonable attorney’s

LABOR CODE VIOLATIONS MAY MEAN FEE AWARD IS MANDATORY—BUT AMOUNT OF FEES ARE DISCRETIONARY AND MAY RESULT IN A DISAPPOINTINGLY SMALL AWARD

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District Finds that Plaintiff Individually Settling for $10,500—Even Though His Claim Was Only For $44.63—Entitled to Garner a $500 Fee Award.         There are many sections of the California Labor Code that have mandatory fee award authority. As examples, Labor Code section 1194(a) provides that employees paid less than their legal overtime

SUBSTANTIAL ATTORNEY’S FEES AWARDED WHEN DEFAULT JUDGMENT VACATED IN PUTATIVE CLASS ACTION

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

Second District Awards Fees and Costs of $37,146 Against Attorney Admitting Neglect in Responding to Complaint.             Can trial courts award substantial attorney’s fees against attorneys admitting neglect when they seek relief from default judgments on behalf of clients?  You bet, said the Second District in a recent unpublished decision.     

Scroll to Top