Second District Finds Ambiguity in 998 Offer, Contrasting It With A More Limited Release of Claims Involved in the Operative Lawsuit. If a litigant is going to ask for a release of claims in a 998 offer, the next case offers a lesson in specificity—avoid asking for a release of generalized […]
Colorful Language from Second District Decision and Famous Quotations Highlight the Deferential Nature of This Review Standard. As we have repeatedly seen, most California fee awards are reviewed under the deferential abuse of discretion standard, especially such components as fee reasonableness, fee amount, and “prevailing party” status. Unless an interpretation of
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
Second District Affirms $138,469.01 Fee Award For Improper Denial of Crucial Requests for Admission. Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.420(a) provides trial courts with authority to impose reasonable expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees, which a requesting party incurs in proving the truth of any matter that is not admitted through the
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 You bet, said the Second District in a recent unpublished decision.
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
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 May 27, 2008) (unpublished), the Sixth District reminded us that
Second District Unpublished Decision Affirms Trial Judge’s Rejection of Expert Testimony on the Value of Services in Deciding an Attorney’s Fees Motion. Even unpublished decisions can contain instructive lessons for practitioners in opposing requests for attorney’s fees, reminding us all that the trial judge is the one ultimately vested with discretion
