. . . Counting Its Lawyer Expenses And Costs Of Reimbursing Winning Litigant’s Attorneys. As reported by Brad Branan in a July 18, 2011 post at the online version of The Sacramento Bee, the Sacramento County Employees’ Retirement System should not be happy with the amount of legal expenses it spent in fighting California […]
“Crack House” Costs Provision is the Fee Entitlement Basis; Amount of Fee Award is $138,067.10. Well, California is well known as surfer paradise and also well known for its marijuana smoking population (residents who have or have not inhaled). In this vein, enjoy this one with us. Beach Cities Collective, a medical-marijuana
MGA-Mattel Fee Battle Rages On. We have posted on this before, but Amanda Bronstad’s July 6, 2011 post in The National Law Journal gives us all an important update. Discovery master Robert O’Brien recommended in the on-going MGA-Mattel Bratz Doll litigation–where MGA recovered $88.5 million after a jury trial–that MGA be paid $84.7
Reason: Nondisclosure of Social Relationship Between Claimant’s Attorney and JAMS Arbitrator. As reported by a June 29, 2011 post on Thomson Reuters News & Insight, a Texas appeals court vacated a $22 million base award and $6 million fee award in favor of a claimant based on claimant’s attorney’s failure to disclose his
Yelp!/Youch!: Plastic Surgeon Hit With $20,000 in SLAPP and $2,000 in Private Attorney General Fee Awards. As reported by Gary Klien in a June 24, 2011 post carried in MercuryNews.com, a Marin County cosmetic surgeon (Ms. Kimberly Henry of Greenbrae) was assessed $20,000 in attorney’s fees for losing a SLAPP motion brought by
California Public Records Act Provides for Fee Shifting. Under our category “Specific Fee Shifting Statutes,” we have posted on the past about the California Public Records Act, which does allow litigants the opportunity to collect attorney’s fees and court costs if prevailing on a request to obtain a release of public documents.
Follows on the Heels of Requesting $129 Million in Fees For MGA in California Federal Action. As reported by Amanda Bronstad in a June 2, 2011 post at Law.com, Orrick–which represented MGA Entertainment Inc. in a California federal court case resulting in a $88.5 million jury verdict win–has filed a motion to withdraw
$5.4 Million in Fees At Issue. As reported in Greg Moran’s May 30, 2011 post in the on-line version of The San Diego Union-Tribune, criminal defense lawyers are battling City of San Diego to obtain reimbursement of $5.4 million in fees incurred in defending six former members of the San Diego pension board
Value of Litigation Estimates Cannot Be Understated, Denying Public Fisc Its Due. Finally, as we wish our readers a Happy Memorial Day break (and our deep tribute to our troops and past veterans either living or deceased/their families), an interesting news tidbit drew our interest to the title of a recent decision by the
Postponed Until May 25, 2011 As we reported to our readers over the weekend, MGA Entertainment is seeking substantial fees and costs from Mattel based on its recent jury trial win in federal court, Bryant v. Mattel, Case No. 04-09049 (C.D.Cal.). Although Mattel is seeking to overturn the jury verdict, it has now
