In The News: Beats Electronics Wins Reimbursement Of $7.9 Million Paid To Its Counsel To Defeat Monster’s Fraud Claims Against Beats

Unsuccessful Fraud Suit Arose Out of Beats’ $3.2 Billion Sale To Apple.

            This post actually is an update to the result reached in Monster, LLC v. Superior Court, 12 Cal.App.5^th 1214 (2d Dist., Div. 7 June 21, 2017) [our No. 14 Top Decision of 2017, discussed in our recent December 24, 2017 post].

            What happened here was that Beats Electronics, which did a $3.2 billion sale to Apple, was sued for fraud by Monster, with Beats bringing its own cross-claims for breach of contract (inclusive of a prayer for fees under two written agreements).  Beats obtained summary judgment against Monster’s fraud claims, triggering adjudication of what fee recovery would come back to Beats given it had paid $7.9 million to Boies Schiller (its counsel) to beat the fraud claims.   

                The Court explained the ensuing procedure:

 At a subsequent case management conference, Beats argued that Civil Code section 1717 required the court, rather than a jury, to determine the amount of attorney's fees it was entitled to recover as damages on its cross-claims. Petitioners, however, asserted that because Beats was seeking its attorney's fees as a form of contract damages, they were entitled to a jury trial on the issue. After receiving supplemental briefing, the court entered an order directing that the amount of Beats's attorney's fees be resolved through a noticed motion.

Petitioners filed a petition for writ of mandate seeking an order directing the trial court to vacate its order, and enter a new order granting them a jury trial on the issue of attorney's fees.

            Just before Christmas, a jury returned a verdict in favor of Beats, requiring Monster to reimburse the $7.9 million in fees which it paid to Boies Schiller. 

            HAT TIP to Richard Pearl. This post has been corrected to reflect the comments of Richard Pearl in our comment section below the post.  Richard was Beats' expert at trial, and he is the author of the CEB treatise entitled, "California Attorney Fee Awards."

Comments

[Rich Pearl]

Hi guys -- happy holidays!

One minor correction on your Monster v. Beats story -- it was Monster that took the writ seeking (and getting) a jury trial, not Beats. (I was Beats' expert at trial.)

Otherwise, thanks for doing such great job on the blog -- I plug you every chance I get.