March 24, 2011

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Court’s OSC Dismissal of Entire Action, Both Complaint And Cross-Complaint, Meant No Contractual Fees Were Recoverable

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

. . . However, Remand For Fee Recovery Evaluation on Dismissed Tort Claim.      For you folks entertaining voluntarily dismissals of actions, must reading in this area–if you are bothered about attorney’s fees exposure–is our state supreme court’s decision in Santisas v. Goodin, 17 Cal.4th 599, 602, 607-608 (1998) [one of our Leading Cases]. We […]

Trade Secrets: Losing Plaintiff In Trade Secret Misappropriation Suit Has Adverse $126,550.13 Fee Award Sustained On Appeal

Cases: Trade Secrets

Blatant Lack of Standing Dooms Plaintiff’s Effort at Reversal.      Civil Code section 3426.4, a fee-shifting statute under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, allows a court to award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to the prevailing party if a trade secrets misappropriation claim is made in “bad faith.” Well, the Legislature did not define “bad

Retainer Agreements: “Framework” Retainer Agreements Do Not Create A Current Attorney-Client Relationship Agreement Between Counsel And Former Client

Cases: Retainer Agreements

Fourth District, Division 3 Distinguishes “Framework” From Classic Retainer Agreements.      In Banning Ranch Conservancy v. Superior Court (City of Newport Beach), Case No. G044223 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 22, 2011) (certified for publication), our local Santa Ana appellate court decided that a “framework” retainer agreement–an open-ended agreement affording counsel the option to create

Homeowner Associations/Prevailing Party: HOA Was Not Liable For Fees And Costs When It Obtained Injunctive Relief Before Dismissing Its Complaint Voluntarily

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Defendant Not Entitled to Fees Where Contractually-Based Complaint Voluntarily Dismissed And Not Entitled to Costs Under Discretionary Prevailing Party Provision.      Homeowner association (HOA)/homeowner disputes have resulted in us doing a fair amount of posts under our category “Homeowner Associations.” Here is one more to add to the list, with a homeowner seeking $64,572.84

Equity: Fees In Partition Action For “Common Benefit” Allowable, Apportioned To Each Party’s Interest In Real Estate

Cases: Equity, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Appellate Court Reversed Award of Accountant Fees Against One Party, Deciding Interest Apportionment of Expenses Was Proper.      In the equity arena, partition is the procedure for segregating or terminating common interests in the same parcel of property, as where property is held jointly or by tenants in common. California has a statutory scheme

Scroll to Top