Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

ELDER ABUSE CLAIM, BASED ON RECKLESSNESS, DOES NOT ALLOW FOR GRANT OF STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S FEES AWARD WHERE CAUSATION NOT PROVEN BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE

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

Second District So Holds In Case of First Impression Statutory Interpretation of Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657.             Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657 provides that a defendant proven liable for physical abuse or neglect under prior sections of the Elder Abuse Act, where the commission of the abuse was done […]

HOMEOWNER WINS ANTI-SLAPP ATTORNEY’S FEES AWARD BECAUSE HOMEOWNER’S ASSOCIATION BROUGHT FRIVOLOUS MOTION AGAINST HER CLAIMS

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District Affirms Fee Award and Clarifies That Frivolousness Findings Do Not Have to be Prolix in Nature.        If a plaintiff defeats an anti-SLAPP motion determined to be frivolous, the plaintiff must be awarded attorneys under the anti-SLAPP statute. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16(c).) Frivolousness requires a finding that the anti-SLAPP

In PRO PER APPELLANT LOSES CHALLENGES TO APPELLATE ATTORNEY FEE AWARD FOR BRINGING A FRIVOLOUS APPEAL OF AN ANTI-SLAPP ORDER

Cases: Billing Record Substantiation, Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Fourth District, Division 3 Sanctions Losing In Pro Per Plaintiff By Affirming $40,000 Attorney’s Fees Award.             Previously, an in pro per litigant filed an anti-SLAPP motion to strike a fraudulent transfer complaint by an opponent.  (See Code Civ. Proc., §425.16 [anti-SLAPP statute].)  In pro per lost the motion, and the trial

UNSUPPORTED CHALLENGE OF “EXCESSIVENESS” OR “DUPLICATIVE WORK” BY APPELLANT CHALLENGING FEE AWARDS REJECTED BY COURT OF APPEAL

Cases: Billing Record Substantiation, Cases: Experts, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District Affirms Award of Anti-SLAPP Fees to Defendant Where Fee Attacks Were Not Supported by Competent Evidence.                          When opposing a fee motion, a litigant should support challenges with competent evidence.  Such evidence can take the form of an expert witness or a particularized challenge to

FIRST DISTRICT HOLDS IT IMPROPER TO APPLY “A MECHANICAL FORMULA” TO REDUCE AN AWARD OF ANTI-SLAPP ATTORNEY’S FEES TO A SUCCESSFUL PARTY

Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Appellate Court Found That Trial Judge Used Incorrect Legal Standard When Reducing a Fee Award by Two-Thirds.             A defendant who brings a successful anti-SLAPP motion is entitled to a mandatory award of attorney’s fees and costs.  (Code Civ. Proc. sec. 425.16(c); Ketchum v. Moses, 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1131 (2001).)  Generally, appellate

ON APPEAL, REVIEWING COURT INDEPENDENTLY REVIEWS STATUTORY ENTITLEMENT TO FEES—AND STILL DETERMINES THE TRIAL JUDGE PROPERLY DENIED FEES TO A PREVAILING PARTY

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

Sixth District Correctly Sets Forth Standard of Review and Still Determines Prevailing Party Not Entitled to Fee Recovery Under the Mobile Residency Law, Civil Code section 1717, or the Unruh Act.             In Ideal Homes v. DenHoy, Case No. H031071 (6th Dist. May 27, 2008) (unpublished), the Sixth District reminded us that

SUBCONTRACTOR LOSES FEE AWARD BASED ON CONTRACT—BUT WINS STATUTORY GRANT OF FEES UNDER CALIFORNIA BAD FAITH WITHHOLDING STATUTES

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Second District Reverses Denial of Attorney’s Fees Where California Statutes Allow a Subcontractor To Seek An Award for Collection of Funds Improperly Withheld by Its Contractor.              This case illustrates that a litigant should not despair if the contract does not have a proper authorization of fees. When in doubt, look, look,

UNPUBLISHED SECOND DISTRICT DECISION AWARDS ATTORNEY’S FEES TO PREVAILING PARTY IN SUIT INVOLVING THE DATING SERVICE CONTRACT FEE SHIFTING STATUTE.

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Court of Appeal Decides Reach of Civil Code section 1694.4(c)             California Civil Code section 1694 et seq. provides a legislative scheme that provides consumer protection for individuals entering into dating service contracts or offers with organizations that provide social referrals services through different milieus (including the Internet).  The contracts must have

Scroll to Top