Recent Articles
SLAPP: Prevailing Parties On ADA Defendant’s Cross-Complaint Against Plaintiff And Her Attorneys Were Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Of $13,000 For Winning A SLAPP Motion Against Cross-Complainant/ADA Defendant
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…
Arbitration: Finding No Basis For Vacatur, Appellate Court Affirms $12 Million-Plus Arbitration Award In Employment Case
. . . Inclusive Of A Total Of $957,640.27 In Fees And Costs Award Components. Arbitration awards, even if wrong on the merits, are difficult…
POOF!, Sanctions: Lower Court’s Dismissal Of Case For Late Filing Of Joint Pretrial Documents Under LASC Local Rule Reversed As Disproportionate
$84,600 In Attorney’s Fees Went POOF! With The Merits Reversal. In Meinhardt v. Sunny Acre LLC,Case No. B343467 (2d Dist., Div. 5 June 23, 2026)…
Liens For Attorney Fees, Retainer Agreements: Plaintiff’s Failure To Obtain A Valid Fee Division Agreement With Other Law Firm Members, After She Left, Means That The Other Attorneys Faced No Fee Exposure For Disbursing Recovery Funds
The Contractual Attorney’s Lien Was Between Plaintiff And The Client, So No Fiduciary Duty Was Owed By The Other Firm Members To Plaintiffs. In Palmieri…
Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Civil Harassment Petition Dismissed Without Prejudice Did Trigger Attorney’s Fees Under CCP § 527.6
$12,500 In Attorney’s Fees Was The Result. In Loew v. Robinson, Case No. B346996 (2d Dist., Div. 6 June 22, 2026) (unpublished), a litigant dismissing…
Sanctions: Mississippi District Court Decision Not Only Imposes Monetary Sanctions But Disqualifies Attorneys From The Case And Mandates Reporting To State Bars For Using AI Hallucinations In Court Filings
FRCP 11 Was The Source Of The Sanctions, With Monetary Sanctions Depending On Whether The Conduct Was In Bad Faith Or Merely Careless. We have…
Allocation, Costs, Homeowner Associations, Prevailing Party On Appeal: HOA Was The Prevailing Party For Appellate Costs And Fees
. . . But Fees Had To Be Allocated To Only Successful Claims Because Opponent Prevailed On Some Issues. The Colony at Cal. Oaks HOA…
Appealability, SLAPP: 2/7 DCA Again Holds That Order Granting Prevailing Party’s Motion For SLAPP Fees Is Not Appealable
This Follows Its Earlier Conclusion In The Published Clapkin Case. On March 17, 2026, we posted on Clapkin v. Levin, 119 Cal.App.5th 222 (2026), a…
Employment, Lodestar, Multipliers, Reasonableness Of Fees: Taduran Decision Recently Certified For Publication
Opinion Affirmed A Negative Multiplier And Rejection Of A Positive Multiplier When Prevailing Employee Challenged The Fee Award As Too Small Under The Abuse Of…
Prevailing Party, Receivers, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Sisters Escaping Liability To County/Receiver In State Housing Law Abatement Receivership Were Entitled To Fees Under Health & Safety Code Section 17980.7(c)(11)—They Were Prevailing Parties
More Generalized H&S Code Section 17984 Did Not Trump More Specific, Recently Enacted Statute, With Sisters Being The Parties Obtaining Their Specific Litigation Objectives Although…
Sanctions: Total Sanctions Of $6,000 Under CCP § 128.7, $5,000 To The Primary Defendant And $1,000 To The Lower Court, Was No Abuse Of Discretion Given Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Being Unable To Explain Why They Opposed A Stay Motion And Given Delegation To A Contract Attorney Who Cited To Non-Existent Cases, Hallucinations, And Citations Which Did Not Exist In Cases Relied On In The Stay Opposition
Attorneys’ Safe Harbor/Technical § 128.7 Arguments Were Forfeited Because They Were Not Raised Before The Lower Court—Not To Mention Attorneys Could Have Withdrawn Their Stay…
In The News: California Judicial Council Releases Court Statistics For 2015-16 Through 2024-25, As Well As For 2024-2025
The Reports Shows Statistics For CA Supreme Court Review Grants, DCA Publication Rates, DCA Disposition Rates, and Superior Court Disposition Rates. On the California…
Class Actions, Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: $2.274 Million Fee Award To Class Counsel, Where The Case Settled For $575,000, Was No Abuse Of Discretion
Plaintiffs Had Asked For About $7.465 Million Inclusive Of A 2.0 Positive Multiplier, With The Appellate Court Rebuffing That Any Further Reduction Was Justified. Defendant…
Discovery: Discovery Sanctions Against Employee, With Respect To Two Sets Of Third-Party Subpoenas, Are Affirmed On Appeal
$12,500 Was The Sanctions Tab Against A Third-Party Law Firm; $11,517.50 Was The Sanctions Award Against Another Third Party. We have related sanctions awards to…
Section 1717: $89,950 Postjudgment Fee Award Under Civil Code Section 1717 Is Affirmed On Appeal
Nothing Showed The Jury Earlier Had Awarded Fees As Damages, With The Prevailing Party’s Section 1717 Fee Request Being Incident To Prevailing Party’s Principal Cause…
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.
-
SLAPP: Prevailing Parties On ADA Defendant’s Cross-Complaint Against Plaintiff And Her Attorneys Were Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Of $13,000 For Winning A SLAPP Motion Against Cross-Complainant/ADA Defendant
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…
-
Arbitration: Finding No Basis For Vacatur, Appellate Court Affirms $12 Million-Plus Arbitration Award In Employment Case
. . . Inclusive Of A Total Of $957,640.27 In Fees And Costs Award Components. Arbitration awards, even if wrong on the merits, are difficult to overturn based on the latitude afforded arbitrators in the absent of an arbitration agreement requiring more stringent protocols. Shifrin v. Strata Equity Global, Inc., Case No. D085526 (4th Dist.,…
-
POOF!, Sanctions: Lower Court’s Dismissal Of Case For Late Filing Of Joint Pretrial Documents Under LASC Local Rule Reversed As Disproportionate
$84,600 In Attorney’s Fees Went POOF! With The Merits Reversal. In Meinhardt v. Sunny Acre LLC,Case No. B343467 (2d Dist., Div. 5 June 23, 2026) (unpublished), the 2/5 DCA reversed a lower court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ case and imposition of an $84,600 attorney’s fees award where plaintiffs tardily filed joint pretrial disclosures the day before…
-
Liens For Attorney Fees, Retainer Agreements: Plaintiff’s Failure To Obtain A Valid Fee Division Agreement With Other Law Firm Members, After She Left, Means That The Other Attorneys Faced No Fee Exposure For Disbursing Recovery Funds
The Contractual Attorney’s Lien Was Between Plaintiff And The Client, So No Fiduciary Duty Was Owed By The Other Firm Members To Plaintiffs. In Palmieri v. Foondos, Case No. C100383 (3d Dist. June 22, 2026) (unpublished), a fight developed between plaintiff and other members of a law firm she left with respect to recovery of…
-
Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Civil Harassment Petition Dismissed Without Prejudice Did Trigger Attorney’s Fees Under CCP § 527.6
$12,500 In Attorney’s Fees Was The Result. In Loew v. Robinson, Case No. B346996 (2d Dist., Div. 6 June 22, 2026) (unpublished), a litigant dismissing a civil harassment restraining order, after obtaining a liminal temporary restraining order, was assessed $12,500 in attorney’s fees under CCP § 527.6 under a discretionary fee-shifting statute as against the…