Recent Articles
In The News, Sanctions: Prominent L.A. Firm Sanctioned Almost $3 Million For Not Being Candid With A District Judge Or Opponent On Expert Discovery Issues
Some Of The Sanctions Were Apportioned Separately Against Supervising Partners And Mid-Level Associates, With Some Of The Attorneys Having To Submit To Ethical Curriculum Requirements—In…
Appeal Sanctions: 2/6 DCA Awards $12,590.20 To Respondent And $8,500 To Court Clerk For Prosecuting A Frivolous Appeal
Appeal Of $72,476.87 Sanctions Award Against Ex-Husband Deemed Frivolous. Just to give you a sense of the dollar amounts of appellate sanctions imposed in one…
SLAPP: Landlord, Successfully Defending Against A SLAPP Motion Against Tenants, Was Not Entitled To SLAPP Fees Awarded By The Lower Court
Reason Was That The Grant Of Fees/Costs Was Summarily Made, Not Meeting Specificity Requirements Under CCP § 128.5. Although we have not looked at the…
Family Law: Litigant Failing To Show She Was A Putative Domestic Partner Was Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Award
Marriage of Aviles Opinion Supported The Result. Marriage of Chevallier & Rodriguez, Case No. H052644 et al. (6th Dist. May 15, 2026) (unpublished) determined a…
Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717: Attorney’s Fees Award In Favor Of Non-Signatory, Alter Ego Targets Was Reversed And Remanded
On Remand, Only Contract Claim Work Could be Awarded, Not On Non-Contract Claims—Lower Court Vested With Discretion To Allocate On Remand. McCain v. Edwards, Case…
Discovery, Sanctions: Although Spoliation Issues Sanction Order Was Reversed, $16,000 Discovery Monetary Sanctions Were Proper Based On Motion Compelling Further Discovery Responses
Although Spoliation and Motion To Compel Issues Were Inextricably Intertwined, Motion To Compel Ruling Supported The Sanctions Award Where The Claimed Expenses Were Not Allocated…
Section 1717: Court Of Appeal Affirms Fee Award, Confirming That A Notice Of Motion For An Attorney’s Fee Request Does Not Have To Specifically Recite The Contract Which Was A Predicate For The Fee Motion
General Reference To The Parties’ Contract Sufficed. Yellow Dog Holdings, LLC v. Regions Bank, Case No. G064613 (4th Dist., Div. 3) (May 12, 2026) (unpublished),…
Allocation, Construction: Where Contractor Did Not Prevail On Contractual Provisions But Did Prevail On Prompt Payment Statutes, Lower Court’s Decision To Award Only A Quarter Of Requested Fees Was No Abuse Of Discretion
Goes To Show You That Discretionary Calls On Allocation Are Oft Times Affirmed On Appeal. K.G. Mullen, Inc. v. Kirakosian, Case No. B322602 (2d Dist.,…
Appealability, Prevailing Party, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Because Order Taking A Civil Harassment Petition Off Calendar Was Not An Appealable Order, Denial Of Attorney’s Fees To Defense Had To Be Remanded To See If There Was A Prevailing Party
Whether A Prevailing Party Even Exists Should Be Determined By The Lower Court, But The Fee Motion Was Timely. In Raheb v. Williamson, Case No….
Private Attorney General: Orange County Superior Court Judge Awards $959,853.73 To Four Organizations Prevailing In California Freedom To Read Act Case
Private Attorney General Statutes Justified The Award. In a case garnering attention in a May 1, 2026 article “Judge says city must pay $1M in…
Section 998: In Lemon Law Car Case, Defense Offers To Correct Under CLRA And Acceptance Of Plaintiff 998 Offers Justified Denial Of Consumer Protection Prevailing Fees To Plaintiff
Also, Plaintiff Correctly Was Not Saddled With Routine Costs Against One Settling Defendant. In an interesting case for lemon law practitioners where correction offers and…
Private Attorney General: Real Parties In Interest And Intervenor Trade Association, Alleging A Direct Pecuniary Interest In Vindicating State Department Policies Which Were Not Upheld In Rodenticides Pesticides Case, Were Jointly And Severally Responsible For Attorney’s Fees To Prevailing Petitioner
After Some Lodestar Reductions And Grant Of A Positive 1.3 Multiplier, About $857,000 Was Petitioner’s Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal. This case involved a petitioner’s…
Probate, Reasonableness Of Fees: Probate Court’s Denial Of Successor Trustee’s Request For Attorney’s Fees Properly Denied
The Fee Request Correctly Denied Because Trustee Breached The Trust, Sought To Recover Impermissible Fees Defending Her Removal, And Were Unreasonable In Nature. Estate of…
Section 998: Where Plaintiff Only Obtained A $15,835 Personal Injury Jury Verdict, After Rejecting An Earlier CCP § 988 Offer For $50,000, Plaintiff Properly Was Saddled With Post-Judgment Costs Of The Defense
Plaintiff’s Failure To Develop A Reasoned Appellate Argument For Reversal Doomed The Appeal. In Cardeas v. Solorzano, Case No. A172766 et al. (1st Dist., Div….
Homeowner Associations: $816,260.08 Fee/Costs Award Under Davis-Stirling Act Fee Shifting Provision Affirmed On Appeal In HOA’s/Affiliates’ Favor
Case Shows How These Disputes Can Be Heartbreaking For Either Side. Burnside v. 1545 Broadway Homeowners Assn., Case No. A171368 et al. (1st Dist., Div….
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.
-
In The News, Sanctions: Prominent L.A. Firm Sanctioned Almost $3 Million For Not Being Candid With A District Judge Or Opponent On Expert Discovery Issues
Some Of The Sanctions Were Apportioned Separately Against Supervising Partners And Mid-Level Associates, With Some Of The Attorneys Having To Submit To Ethical Curriculum Requirements—In A Word, Partners, Prudently Supervise Your Associates! Although we do not want to mention names (because it out there in the public media anyway), District Judge Chen of the Northern…
-
Appeal Sanctions: 2/6 DCA Awards $12,590.20 To Respondent And $8,500 To Court Clerk For Prosecuting A Frivolous Appeal
Appeal Of $72,476.87 Sanctions Award Against Ex-Husband Deemed Frivolous. Just to give you a sense of the dollar amounts of appellate sanctions imposed in one Division of the Second District, the Ventura Court of Appeal, in Marriage of Walther, Case No. B340131 (2d Dist., Div. 6 May 20, 2026) (unpublished), found ex-husband’s appeal of a…
-
SLAPP: Landlord, Successfully Defending Against A SLAPP Motion Against Tenants, Was Not Entitled To SLAPP Fees Awarded By The Lower Court
Reason Was That The Grant Of Fees/Costs Was Summarily Made, Not Meeting Specificity Requirements Under CCP § 128.5. Although we have not looked at the underlying papers in this matter, we can say that Lichtenstein v. Stalley, Case No. B347325 (2d Dist., Div. 5 May 19, 2026) (unpublished) reminds that a plaintiff defeating a SLAPP…
-
Family Law: Litigant Failing To Show She Was A Putative Domestic Partner Was Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Award
Marriage of Aviles Opinion Supported The Result. Marriage of Chevallier & Rodriguez, Case No. H052644 et al. (6th Dist. May 15, 2026) (unpublished) determined a litigant, who together with her boyfriend did not file Declarations of Domestic Partnership with California’s Secretary of State, was properly denied an attorney’s fees award by the lower court because…
-
Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717: Attorney’s Fees Award In Favor Of Non-Signatory, Alter Ego Targets Was Reversed And Remanded
On Remand, Only Contract Claim Work Could be Awarded, Not On Non-Contract Claims—Lower Court Vested With Discretion To Allocate On Remand. McCain v. Edwards, Case No. C101256 (3d Dist. May 14, 2026) (unpublished) is a very contested case where, eventually, some non-signatory, alter ego targets evaded exposure where the contract between the predicate signatory and…
-
Discovery, Sanctions: Although Spoliation Issues Sanction Order Was Reversed, $16,000 Discovery Monetary Sanctions Were Proper Based On Motion Compelling Further Discovery Responses
Although Spoliation and Motion To Compel Issues Were Inextricably Intertwined, Motion To Compel Ruling Supported The Sanctions Award Where The Claimed Expenses Were Not Allocated To Any Specific Relief. In Glickman v. Newmeyer & Dillion LLP, Case No. G065111 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 13, 2026) (unpublished), our local Santa Ana Court, in a 3-0…