Recent Articles
Appeal Sanctions: In Pro Per Appellants Will Have To Pay The Reasonable Appellate Fees Of Their Opponent Based On AI Hallucination Citations
Superior Court Judge Will Determine The Fees To Be Awarded. Pro per appellants are not immune from appellate sanctions for having used AI hallucinations citations…
Fee Clause Interpretation, Probate, Settlement: Attorney’s Fees Were Assessed Against Trustee Based On Handwritten Settlement Agreement With A Contractual Fees Clause
Both Sides Were Represented By Counsel In The Negotiating and Signing of The Agreement. The Fifth District in Kirkland v. Beeck, Case No. F090251 (5th Dist….
Sanctions: First District Parts Company From The Second District On Whether A Safe Harbor Sanctions Motion Has To Have A Hearing Date
This May Go Up for California Supreme Court Review In Ari Law P.C. v. Autonation.com, Inc., Case No. A173620 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 26, 2026)…
Class Actions: 58.8% Fee Award To Class Counsel Out of Class Settlement Is Approved By New York Federal Court
Attorney Author’s Commentary Posits Whether It Is A Poster Child for Class Action Abuse Or Just Unusual Circumstances. As attorney Eric Troutman discussed in an…
Costs, Multipliers, Reasonableness of Fees, Requests For Admission: $200,000 Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Elderly Patient In A Senior Facility, Over A 60% Reduction From The Requested Lodestar Fees, Was Affirmed On Appeal Based On Negative Multiplier Factors And The Abuse Of Discretion Review Standard
Lower Court Also Did Not Err In Taxing Costs For Unreasonable, Unused Photocopies of Exhibits and Enlargements. In Aud v. RRT Enterprises, LP, Case No….
Family Law: Ex-Wife Properly Denied Family Code Section 2030 Fees Because She Had Some Assets, She Chose Not To Work, And Her Counsel Drove Up The Costs In The Dissolution Action
$60,000 Was The Denied Request. In Marriage of Patel, Case No. B351488 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Aug. 24, 2026) (unpublished), the family law judge denied…
Sanctions: Where Ex-Attorneys Failed To Dismiss A Case As Promised, Sanctions Were Appropriate Where The Case Was Not Dismissed During The Safe Harbor Period Or Even By The Date Of The Sanctions Hearing
$10,450 In Sanctions Under CCP Section 128.7 Were Imposed, Less Than The $37,000-Plus Request. Ghermezian v. Ruiz, Case No. B345272 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Aug….
Reasonableness Of Fees: $72,441 Fee Award In Contentious Real Estate Litigation Is Affirmed On Appeal
$96,529 Was The Request, With No Reporter’s Transcript And No Abuse Of Discretion Sealing The Conclusion. Nasey v. Fell Holdings LLC, Case No. A175452 (1st…
Arbitration, Sanctions: $1,822.50 Sanction Issued By Arbitrator Without Notices Is Stricken From Confirmed Arbitration Award
However, The Remaining Part Of A Substantial Award Is Sustained. In Alharbi Brothers v. Corona Town Farmers Market, Case No. D086595 (4th Dist., Div. 1…
Private Attorney General: Litigant Obtaining Relief For Himself As Far As Clarifying An Arbitration Award On His Medical License Was Properly Denied CCP § 1021.5 Fees Because It Did Not Vindicate A Broader Interest—Just His Interest
$234,344 Fee Request, Denied By The Lower Court, Was Sustained On Appeal. In Bulkin v. Medical Board of Cal., Case No. B350396 (2d Dist., Div….
In The News . . . . Orange County Has Spent $4.1 Million In Attorney’s Fees Over Four Years In Defending Cases Involving A Former OC District Attorney Supervisor In Sexual Harassment Cases
Settlements And Verdicts Total About $12 Million, With Appeals Being Pursued On The Contested Cases. As reported in the August 16, 2026 edition of The…
Costs, Quantum Meruit: Discharged Attorneys Not Paid By Client Had $60,000 Damages Award Stricken For Insufficient Evidence
Attorneys Did Not Present Any Evidence Of Hourly Rate Or Hours Worked; However, Costs Award Was Affirmed. Pacific Attorney Group v. Nejad, Case No. G064975…
Appeal Sanctions: $5,000 Was The Appellate Sanction For Filing A Frivolous Writ Petition
Also, Lack Of Candor With The Appellate Court In The Writ Petition Was Mentioned. The 4/3 DCA, in West v. Superior Court, Case No. G066888…
Landlord/Tenant, Nonsignatories, Section 1717: Out Of Two Defendants Claiming To Be Prevailing Parties Under A Contractual Lease Clause, Neither Was Entitled To Fees
One Defendant Was Found To Forfeit All Rights Under The Lease On Summary Adjudication, And The Other Was Not A Lease Signatory. In Morales v….
Section 998: California Supreme Court Rules That Section 998 Offers With Alternative Options Are Valid, If Properly Structured With Certainty For The Options
It Disagrees With The Court of Appeal’s Categorical Invalidity Argument. In Gorobets v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC, Case No. S287946 (Cal. Supreme Court…
Services
About Cal Attorneys Fees
Cal Attorneys Fees is a trusted legal research platform designed for California lawyers to efficiently review case law and access concise abstracts relevant to their ongoing matters. With over 10,000 cited cases and articles, it serves as a comprehensive repository for informed, strategic advocacy.
Contact Us
Have questions or need support? Reach out to the Cal Attorneys Fees team for assistance with case law access, article submissions, or account inquiries — we’re here to help California lawyers work smarter and faster.
-
Appeal Sanctions: In Pro Per Appellants Will Have To Pay The Reasonable Appellate Fees Of Their Opponent Based On AI Hallucination Citations
Superior Court Judge Will Determine The Fees To Be Awarded. Pro per appellants are not immune from appellate sanctions for having used AI hallucinations citations in their AOB. The penalty in Varma v. The Bank of New York Mellon, Case No. E085566 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 27, 2026) (unpublished) for in pro per appellants in this…
-
Fee Clause Interpretation, Probate, Settlement: Attorney’s Fees Were Assessed Against Trustee Based On Handwritten Settlement Agreement With A Contractual Fees Clause
Both Sides Were Represented By Counsel In The Negotiating and Signing of The Agreement. The Fifth District in Kirkland v. Beeck, Case No. F090251 (5th Dist. Aug. 26, 2026; posted Aug. 27, 2026) (unpublished), was a case involving dueling probate petitions by a trustee/beneficiary and a cousin beneficiary under a trust, with cousin prevailing and being…
-
Sanctions: First District Parts Company From The Second District On Whether A Safe Harbor Sanctions Motion Has To Have A Hearing Date
This May Go Up for California Supreme Court Review In Ari Law P.C. v. Autonation.com, Inc., Case No. A173620 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 26, 2026) (published), the First District parted company from two Second District decisions (Galleria, 179 Cal.App.4th 535 and J.N., 120 Cal.App.5th 544) in arriving at the conclusion that the CCP section 1010 notice requirements…
-
Class Actions: 58.8% Fee Award To Class Counsel Out of Class Settlement Is Approved By New York Federal Court
Attorney Author’s Commentary Posits Whether It Is A Poster Child for Class Action Abuse Or Just Unusual Circumstances. As attorney Eric Troutman discussed in an article found in the August 26, 2026 edition of JD Supra, a New York district judge in Watson v. Manhattan Luxury Automobiles, 2026 WL 2267941 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 8, 2026) was…
-
Costs, Multipliers, Reasonableness of Fees, Requests For Admission: $200,000 Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Elderly Patient In A Senior Facility, Over A 60% Reduction From The Requested Lodestar Fees, Was Affirmed On Appeal Based On Negative Multiplier Factors And The Abuse Of Discretion Review Standard
Lower Court Also Did Not Err In Taxing Costs For Unreasonable, Unused Photocopies of Exhibits and Enlargements. In Aud v. RRT Enterprises, LP, Case No. B340727 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Aug. 26, 2026) (unpublished), plaintiff sued for elder abuse under two statutes (including a Health & Safety Code provision) and negligence, with a jury finding…
-
Family Law: Ex-Wife Properly Denied Family Code Section 2030 Fees Because She Had Some Assets, She Chose Not To Work, And Her Counsel Drove Up The Costs In The Dissolution Action
$60,000 Was The Denied Request. In Marriage of Patel, Case No. B351488 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Aug. 24, 2026) (unpublished), the family law judge denied ex-wife’s request for $60,000 in needs-based fees under Family Code section 2030. The appellate court affirmed. Although the lower court’s reasons at the oral hearing were not a model of…