February 2015

Fee Clause Interpretation: Broadly Worded Provision Allowed Fee Recovery To Home Park Tenant Prevailing In Landlord Premises Liability Case

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Landlord/Tenant

    Trial Court’s Denial of Fees Reversed.        Plaintiff was a tenant in a manufactured home park, falling while walking across a common area lawn. Plaintiff brought a premises liability suit against landlord, garnering a $311,899.67 damages award. However, the trial court denied plaintiff’s fee request.      That was reversed on appeal in […]

Costs: District Judge’s Denial Of Costs Requested Vacated With Respect To Prevailing RICO Defendant

Cases: Costs

  Unexplained Denial Was Erroneous.      In Harrington v. EquiTrust Life Ins. Co., Case No. 12-17267 (9th Cir. Feb. 24, 2015) (published), defendant prevailed on RICO claims through a summary judgment motion, but the district judge denied costs—providing no explanation for the denial. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the summary judgment grant, but reversed the costs

Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717: Prevailing Alter Ego Entitled To Fee Recovery Based On Fee Clause Allowing For Same In A Payment Dispute

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Reynolds Metal Drove the Reversal.      Cooley Constr., Inc. v. Matthews, Case No. G050422 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Feb. 24, 2015) (unpublished) was a situation where an alter ego defendant prevailed against a plaintiff in a construction payment dispute, which had two fees clauses—one specifying no fees for construction disputes and another allowing recovery

Sanctions: $10,443 Sanction Against Plaintiff’s Attorney Under CCP § 128.7 Reversed For Dilatory Substituting Out/Withdrawal Of Case Because This Section Does Not Target Generalized Bad Behavior

Cases: Sanctions

  No Flawed Pleading Being Pursued or Advocated, and Safe Harbor 21 Day Period Not Followed.      Justice Bedsworth, on behalf of a 3-0 panel, reversed a $10,443 sanctions award against plaintiff’s attorney of $10,443 under Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7 founded on the lower court’s perception that the attorney should have substituted out

Bankruptcy, Deadlines: Plaintiff Chapter 7 Bankrupt Who Filed Fee Motion One Year After Dismissal Did So Untimely

Cases: Bankruptcy Efforts, Cases: Deadlines

  Also, Chapter 7 Trustee Properly Dismissed Case Against Defendants, With Chapter 7 Trustee “Owning” the Dismissed Claims.      Plaintiff, a Chapter 7 bankrupt, tried to get attorney’s fees a year after one of his actions was dismissed in favor of defendants by the Chapter 7 trustee under a settlement agreement. Plaintiff still went to

Prevailing Party, Special Fee Shifting Statute: Reversal Of Statutory Violation Award Under Health & Safety Code Statute Meant Attorney’s Fees Award Had To Be Revisited

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Degree of Success Was Key, Where Plaintiff Went From Obtaining $270,000 To Only $500.      Lemaire v. Covenant Care California, LLC, Case No. B248672 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Feb. 23, 2015) (published) is a situation where plaintiff won $270,000 in statutory damages for the defense failure to maintain complete and accurate medical records at

Equity: Due Process Strikes Again—Fee Award By New Judge After Retired Judge Only Awarded Costs Had To Be Stricken On Due Process Grounds

Cases: Equity

  Civil Harassment Proceeding Was the Context      Due process, due process, that concept drove the striking of an attorney’s fees award in a civil harassment proceeding context.      In Bridges v. Smith, Case No. C074704 (3d Dist. Feb. 23, 2015) (unpublished), plaintiffs were granted a 5-year civil harassment restraining order to stop defendant’s alleged

Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 998: Defendant Prevailing Under Fees Clause Entitled To Unapportioned Fee Recovery, Another Plaintiff Not Entitled To Fees Given Failure To Show Fees Clause Was Part Of Contract, And Defendant Properly Denied

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 998

  Olio Of Fees/Costs Issues Confronted By 4/1 DCA In Unpublished Decision. About olio: Is there that o’re his French ragout Or olio that wad staw a sow, Or fricassee wad mak her spew Wi’ perfect scunner, Looks down wi’ sneering, scornfu’ view On sic a dinner?      — Robert Burns      Cosco Fire Protection,

Family Law, Fee Clause Interpretation: Narrower Fees Clause Did Not Preempt Family Code Section 2030/271 Fee Award To Wife

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  Clause Much Narrower Than Preemptive Fees Clause in Guilardi Opinion.      Ex-wife in Marriage of Dryer, Case No. H038921 (6th Dist. Feb. 20, 2015) (unpublished) garnered Family Code section 2030/271 fees totaling $60,000 against ex-husband, who principally argued that a marital settlement agreement (MSA) fees clause was broad enough to “trump” fee recovery under

Intellectual Property, Prevailing Party: $1,518,687.94 In Fees Against Three Losing Defendants Justified In Lanham Act False Endorsement Case Involving Bob Marley’s Image

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Base Award Against Prevailing Plaintiffs Was $648,543.00.      The Ninth Circuit in Fifty-Six Hope Road Music, Ltd. v. A.V.E.L.A., Inc., Case No. 12-17502 (9th Cir. Feb. 20, 2015) (published) affirmed, in a 2-1 decision, the merits of compensatory/lost profit awards against five defendants in a Lanham Act false endorsement suit brought by two plaintiffs

Scroll to Top