Recent Articles
Costs, Deadlines, POOF!: Although Plaintiff Won On The Merits, Substantial Fee Recovery and Routine Costs Recovery Were Reversed As A Matter Of Law
Fees Were Not Allowable Without A Fees Motion; Costs Were Not Allowable Because Failure To Use Judicial Council Worksheet Gave No Basis For A Conclusion…
Costs, Deadlines, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: CHRO Prevailing Party On Modification Request And Appeal Work On Certain Orders Was Entitled To The Lower Court’s Fee Recovery
However, Because A Harassment Renewal Order Was Reversed, Fees For Those Efforts Were Not Allowable As Well As Routine Cost Recovery Because No Memorandum Of…
Appealability, SLAPP: Order Denying or Granting A SLAPP Fees Motion Is Not Appealable
2/7 DCA Decides To Follow Its Prior Opinion in Doe v. Luster. In Clapkin v. Levin, Case No. B340606 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 16,…
Liens For Attorney Fees: Third District Holds That A Single Declaratory Relief Action Against Both The Clients And Competing Attorney Lien Claimant Is A Permissible Way To Enforce Attorney Lien Claims On Settlement Or Judgment Proceeds
Second Attorney Obtaining A Recovery Does Not Have To Wait For Clients’ Former Attorney To Bring A Separate Individual Action Against The Clients. In Jacobs…
Family Law: Marriage of Hoch Opinion Now Published
Case Held That Not Stipulating To Legal Separation On Religious Grounds And Not Particularizing Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Request Led To A Reversal. On…
Common Fund, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Plaintiff Winning Derivative Claim On Behalf Of A Limited Partnership Was Properly Awarded Fees Under Corporations Code Section 15910.05(b) Out Of The Damage Recovery Obtained By The LP Against Defendant
Section 15910.05(b) Is Not Displaced By Common Fund/Substantial Benefit Theories, Although Those Theories Also Supported The Fee Award. In Duboff v. Schermer, Case Nos. B343324…
Lis Pendens, Prevailing Party, Probate: Respondents In Probate Dispute Venued In Marin County Won Attorney’s Fees In Successfully Expunging A Lis Pendens And Then Won More Substantial Fees As The Prevailing Parties After Petitioner Voluntarily Dismissed A 850 Petition
Various Statutes Gave Rise To Fee Entitlement In The Probate Case. One of our readers, Ronald Foreman of San Francisco’s Foreman & Brasso, sent us…
Costs, Section 998: Where A Losing Cross-Defendant Was Never Served With A Section 998 Offer, Trial Court Erred In Awarding Expert Witness Expenses Against Her
Costs Recovery Was Void Under CCP § 473(d), With A Remand Ordered To See If Other Costs Were Allowable. Warren v. Shahar, Case No. B339274…
Lodestar, Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Deed Restriction Document Gave Rise to Contractual Attorney’s Fees
$144,210 Was The Fees Award, With Attorney Declaration Of Efforts Sufficient And Rejecting The Notion That City’s Lead Counsel’s Salary Guided The Lodestar Analysis. In…
Probate: Counsel Appointed To Represent A Conservatee Pursuant To Probate Code Section 1471 Was Entitled To Conservatorship-Related Compensation ….
However, Compensation For A Civil Proceeding Separate From The Conservatorship Could Not Be Compensated Under 1471; Rather Probate Code Section 2430 Requisites Had To Be…
Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Civil Harassment Fee-Shifting Statute Does Not Require A Determination Of Either Party’s Ability To Pay Before Awarding Fees
Compared To Other Statutes, Nothing In CCP § 527.6 Requires A Needs Assessment. In States v. MacKrell, Case No. G065683 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar….
Lodestar: Do Awards to Government Attorneys Have To Match Their Salaries …
Naught, Said Appellate Court In Unpublished Opinion Based On No Supporting Authority. We do not know if this means much, but maybe for governmental attorneys…
Appeal Sanctions: $5,000 Was The Appellate Sanctions For AI Hallucination Transgressions
Another Published Opinion In This Area—Be A Human, Read, Check, And Verify AI Research. In re the Domestic Partnership of Campos & Munoz, Case No….
Probate: Trustee Found Liable For Misappropriating Property Was Properly Assessed A Two-Fold Civil Penalty, As Well As Hit With Reasonable Attorney’s Fees And Costs
Probate Code Section 859 Was The Penalty And Fees/Costs Entitlement Statute. In a very sad set of facts, but ones under which beneficiaries prevailed against…
Arbitration: Even With Qualifying Language Found Insufficient, Fees And Costs Provisions In The Employment Agreement Were Found Substantively Unconscionable
However, Remand Was Ordered To See If Severance Could Allow Arbitration To Proceed. In Foster v. Liberty Military Housing Holdings, LLC, Case No. D085268 (4th…
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.
-
Costs, Deadlines, POOF!: Although Plaintiff Won On The Merits, Substantial Fee Recovery and Routine Costs Recovery Were Reversed As A Matter Of Law
Fees Were Not Allowable Without A Fees Motion; Costs Were Not Allowable Because Failure To Use Judicial Council Worksheet Gave No Basis For A Conclusion On Whether The Costs Were Reasonable, In Response To Defendant’s Motion To Tax Costs. Pelloni v. Mirshahi, Case Nos. B336950 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 4 Mar. 17, 2026) (unpublished)…
-
Costs, Deadlines, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: CHRO Prevailing Party On Modification Request And Appeal Work On Certain Orders Was Entitled To The Lower Court’s Fee Recovery
However, Because A Harassment Renewal Order Was Reversed, Fees For Those Efforts Were Not Allowable As Well As Routine Cost Recovery Because No Memorandum Of Costs Was Filed. In litigation which has gone on for a while and generated several appeals, the dust may have finally settled with the appellate court opinion in George v.…
-
Appealability, SLAPP: Order Denying or Granting A SLAPP Fees Motion Is Not Appealable
2/7 DCA Decides To Follow Its Prior Opinion in Doe v. Luster. In Clapkin v. Levin, Case No. B340606 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 16, 2026) (published), Acting Justice Segal on behalf of a 3-0 2/7 DCA panel dismissed an appeal brough by cross-complainants from a request for an award of SLAPP fees after cross-defendants’…
-
Liens For Attorney Fees: Third District Holds That A Single Declaratory Relief Action Against Both The Clients And Competing Attorney Lien Claimant Is A Permissible Way To Enforce Attorney Lien Claims On Settlement Or Judgment Proceeds
Second Attorney Obtaining A Recovery Does Not Have To Wait For Clients’ Former Attorney To Bring A Separate Individual Action Against The Clients. In Jacobs v. Papez, Case No. C100761 (3d Dist. Mar. 13, 2026) (published), which involved dueling claims by two attorneys to enforce lien rights against clients’ settlement, the Third District held “that…
-
Family Law: Marriage of Hoch Opinion Now Published
Case Held That Not Stipulating To Legal Separation On Religious Grounds And Not Particularizing Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Request Led To A Reversal. On February 20, 2026, we posted on Marriage of Hoch, Case No. G063467 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 17, 2026) (unpublished), which held that Family Code section 271 sanctions were not…
-
Common Fund, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Plaintiff Winning Derivative Claim On Behalf Of A Limited Partnership Was Properly Awarded Fees Under Corporations Code Section 15910.05(b) Out Of The Damage Recovery Obtained By The LP Against Defendant
Section 15910.05(b) Is Not Displaced By Common Fund/Substantial Benefit Theories, Although Those Theories Also Supported The Fee Award. In Duboff v. Schermer, Case Nos. B343324 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 12, 2026) (unpublished), plaintiff won a substantial damages recovery of almost $6 million against defendant in a limited partnership derivative action (where plaintiff…