Raceway Ford Cases, Case Nos. E054517/E056595 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 16, 2014) (published)
In this one, the defense—except for one fraud claim as to one plaintiff—waxed plaintiffs bringing various consumer and unfair competition claims. Defendants’ reward was a $1,503,084.50 fee recovery under various statutes. However, that went POOF! on appeal when several of the claim adjudications were reversed after a bench trial. The reversals meant the fee recovery had to reevaluated down the line.
Marriage of Cross and Melim, Case No. H039666 (6th Dist. Sept. 16, 2014) (unpublished)
The family law judge hit an ex-wife with $3,537 fees under the Family Code section 271 sanctions statute. This award was found to be no abuse of discretion on appeal, because the record showed ex-wife had underestimated her income and had not shared emails showing she had bought Gucci/Louis Vuitton/2012 Raiders season tickets.
Farmers Ins. Exch. V. Karnazes, Case No. A138999 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 16, 2014) (unpublished)
A lower court denied a motion to tax costs by a defendant in an interpleader action. Appellant tried to argue that an “each side will bear their own costs and fees” clause in a settlement agreement bound a nonparty to agreement, an argument not liked by the appellate court. Also, appellant presented “only a barrage of conclusory assertions” rather than reasoned arguments about the alleged impropriety of certain costs, which again did not impress the reviewing court.
Comments