Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

California Disabled Persons Act: State Appellate Decision Finds That ADA Does Not Preempt, So Prevailing Defendant Entitled To Fee Award Without Showing Action Was Frivolous, Unreasonable, Or Groundless

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Preemption, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

First District, Division 4 Disagrees with Ninth Circuit’s Hubbard Decisions.      In our July 3, 2008 and January 12, 2009 posts, we discussed the Ninth Circuit’s Hubbard decisions (Hubbard v. SoBreck, LLC, 531 F.2d 983 (9th Cir. 2008) and Hubbard v. SoBreck, LLC, 554 F.3d 742 (9th Cir. 2009)), which held that a mandatory award

Indemnity And Apportionment: $402,596.40 Fee Award Affirmed In Refusal To Defend Dispute

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Discovery, Cases: Indemnity, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Sixth District Found Opposing Party Forfeited Challenge to Billing Record Objections When It Failed to Attack Omissions Through Discovery Motion.      In the next case, the Sixth District—in UDC-Universal Development, L.P. v. CH2M Hill, Case No. H033862 (6th Dist. Jan. 22, 2010) (unpublished)—affirmed a $402,596.40 fee award under a contractual provision when sustaining a trial

Reasonableness Of Fees: Fifth District Gives Us Some Insights Into Their Thinking On the Subject

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Except for Complaint in Intervention Fees, Court of Appeal Sustains $1,764,222.50 Fee Award.      For those of you practicing in California’s Central Valley (or, for that matter, attorneys wanting some more insight into how judges gauge the reasonableness of fees), stay tuned for the next one.      The Fifth District, in Ennis Commercial Properties, LLC

Costs Deadline, Fee Substantiation and Allocation: Fees/Costs Awarded In Anti-Speculation Liquidated Damages Clause Dispute Affirmed In Favor Of Developer

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Costs, Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Liquidated Damages Clause Found Valid; Fees/Costs Award Sustained Also.      This next decision should be of substantive interest to both developers and our readers interested in fee issues.      Although unpublished, Beck Properties, Inc. v. Hameed, Case No. C058279 (Dec. 11, 2009) decided that an anti-speculation clause in a purchase agreement between a developer and

Fee Clause Interpretation: Landlord Awarded Substantial Attorney Fees For Prevailing In Three Actions Against Feisty Former Tenant

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Court of Appeal Finds Fee Clause is Broad Enough to Encompass All Three Actions.      Under Civil Code section 1717, the key to recovering fees in disputes involving contract and tort claims often devolves to a determination of whether the fee clause is sufficiently broad to encompass matters “arising out of” or “concerning” the

Prevailing Party: Defendants City And Landlord Win Summary Judgment and Gain $184,605 Fee Award As Prevailing Parties Under Civil Code Section 1717

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Standard of Review, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Both Determinations Affirmed on Appeal.      In Marinos v. City of Rocklin, Case Nos. C058958/C060844 (3d Dist. Nov. 4, 2009) (unpublished), defendants City and landlord prevailed on a summary judgment motion based on plaintiffs not complying with a notice provision in a settlement agreement with a fees clause. The trial court then awarded defendants $184,605

Fee Substantiation: Plaintiff’s Declaration About Hourly Rates And Small Law Firm Survey Deemed Sufficient Substantiation For Fee Request, Especially Given No Challenge By The Defense

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Third District Also Addresses Clerical Time and Multiplier Issues.      Plaintiff won a jury verdict of $16,536 on a failure to accommodate discrimination claim. Under the fee-shifting provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA; Government Code section 12965(b)), the trial court awarded plaintiff $189,503.40 in fees, after lodestar deductions for clerical tasks, duplicative

Fee Substantiation: Improper Authentication of Prior Counsel Fee Bills Costs Prevailing Party $141,283.75 In Ultimate Fee Recoupment

Cases: Costs, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Demonstrative Evidence and Computer Related Expenses Were Properly Allowed As Routine Costs.      The next case is one that will remind practicing litigators to make sure they properly authenticate fee submissions in support of attorney’s fees request. The decision also has a nice discussion of some routine cost items that are recoverable in this

SLAPP: $112,353.75 Fee Award To Cross-Defendant Affirmed Where Claims Of Overstaffing Not Properly Demonstrated

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Standard of Review, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Fourth District, Division 3 Finds No Abuse of Discretion.      In Raining Data Corp. v. Barrenechea, Case No. G040902 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 26, 2009) (unpublished), plaintiff lost a SLAPP motion against a cross-defendant arising from a trade secret misappropriation dispute, with the trial court awarding $112, 353.75 to cross-defendant under Code of Civil

Contempt Proceedings: $67,392.84 Fee Award For Contempt In Disobeying Injunction Reversed

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

Third District Affirms Contempt Order, But Reverses Fee Order On Due Process Grounds.      For those of you having an interest in contempt proceedings (which are quasi-criminal in nature), the next case is for you. It also reinforces that fee awards must be crafted with regard to giving an opponent adequate due process rights.     

Scroll to Top