Cross-Complainant’s Failure To Oppose the Fee Request Was Dispositive, With Trial Level Fee Award Affirmed And Remand To Consider Request For Appellate Fees.
Anti-SLAPP motions which are granted give the winning defendants/cross-defendants the ability to seek reasonable, mandatory fees. In Thottam v. Edgar, Case No. B351320 (2d Dist., Div. 4 June 24, 2026) (unpublished), a defendant subject to an ADA architectural barriers suit decided to launch a cross-claim against plaintiff and her attorneys for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, civil conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and declaratory relief (plus a request for sanctions, asking for damages of no less than $500,000, declaratory relief, sanctions, and attorney’s fees). Defendant/cross-complainant did not do well before the trial and appellate courts, which granted and sustained a SLAPP motion as to the cross-complaint based primarily on the litigation privilege. The lower court awarded prevailing SLAPP parties $13,000 in mandatory attorney’s fees (the full ask).
The fee award grant was affirmed because (1) cross-complainant never opposed the fee motion at the trial court level, constituting a forfeiture (Blackburn v. Charnley, 117 Cal.App.4th 758, 769 (2004); (2) detailed time records did not have to be presented (Mardirossian & Associates, Inc. v. Ersoff, 153 Cal.App.4th 257, 269 (2007); (3) the court could rely on counsel estimates of reply time/hearing work (G.R. v. Intelligator, 185 Cal.App.4th 606, 620-621 (2010); and (4) cross-complainant failed to explain why the SLAPP motion time was excessive (G.R., at 621). In addition, the appellate court remanded for the trial court to consider cross-defendant’s request for fees incurred in the appeal under CCP § 425.16(c).