News & Analysis as of

Attorney's Fees Cal Code of Civil Procedure

ArentFox Schiff

Gramajo v. Joe’s Pizza: California Plaintiffs Winning Wage or Overtime Claims Must Receive Some Attorney Fees

ArentFox Schiff on

In Gramajo v. Joe’s Pizza on Sunset, Inc., Case Nos. B322992/B323024 (Cal. App. Mar. 25, 2024), the California Court of Appeal held that employees who win in court on a claim for minimum or overtime wages must be awarded at...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

Court of Appeal Validates 998 Offer Holding That There is No Exception Under Section 998 for Intervening Changes in the Law

On February 27, 2024, the California Second District Court of Appeal issued an opinion in Jacob Ayers v. FCA US, LLC (B315884), in which it reversed the Los Angeles County Superior Court’s cost judgment following the...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

In a Surprise Move, California Enacts Boatload of New Pro-Employer Laws – Nah, Just Kidding, It’s Going to be More Burdensome than...

In what has become an annual tradition, California – that fabled workers’ paradise on earth – has enacted a slew of new laws that, come January, may keep even the most hearty HR professionals up at night. As we reported...more

Downey Brand LLP

Environmental Real Parties may be entitled to attorney’s fees for helping agency defend against private party attacks on highway...

Downey Brand LLP on

In City of San Clemente v. Department of Transportation (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 1131, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that a homeowner’s association (Association), who challenged a proposed state highway extension...more

Snell & Wilmer

Section 998’s Cost-Shifting Provisions May Apply When Case Ends in Settlement

Snell & Wilmer on

A divided court in Madrigal v. Hyundai Motor America (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 385, as modified on denial of reh’g (May 9, 2023), review filed (June 20, 2023) recently held that the cost-shifting penalty provisions of California...more

Snell & Wilmer

The Implications of California’s Departure From Judgments by Confession

Snell & Wilmer on

Traditionally, California permitted judgments by confession are subject to certain limitations, such as requiring an independent attorney to examine the proposal and advise the debtor on the waiver of rights and defenses. As...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The California Supreme Court - July 22, 2022

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Siry Investment, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour, No. S262081: The Supreme Court resolved two issues: whether (1) a party in default has standing to file a motion for a new trial alleging legal error in the calculation of damages, and...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

California Court of Appeal Makes The “Safe Harbor” A Little Bit Safer

On February 24, 2022, in Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Currency Corp., (B304809, Feb. 24, 2022), the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two (Los Angeles), certified for publication a unanimous decision applying...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Landlords Beware: Bankruptcy Court Litigation Could Come at a Cost

Holland & Knight LLP on

Those who lease commercial property may find themselves unwilling participants in complex proceedings before the U.S. bankruptcy courts when a tenant files bankruptcy. Meanwhile, the lease becomes an asset among the "property...more

Snell & Wilmer

CCP 998 Does Not Confer an Independent Right to Attorneys’ Fees

Snell & Wilmer on

A so-called “offer to compromise” under California Code of Civil Procedure section 998 can reverse the parties’ entitlement to costs after the date of the offer, depending on the outcome of the litigation. Cal. Code Civ....more

Snell & Wilmer

What If Your CCP 998 Offer is Silent on Costs?

Snell & Wilmer on

In California, the “prevailing party” in litigation is generally entitled to recover its costs as a matter of law. See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032. But under California Code of Civil Procedure section 998, a party may make a...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

New California Employment Laws Will Require Significant Changes in 2019

California Governor Jerry Brown recently signed into law several bills that will have significant impact on employers’ workplace obligations. Effective January 1, 2019, the new laws will restrict nondisclosure agreements and...more

Fisher Phillips

California Employers To Face Raft Of New #MeToo Laws

Fisher Phillips on

Wrapping up a whirlwind weekend, California Governor Jerry Brown just signed several pieces of legislation that will create new employer obligations in the areas of sexual harassment and gender discrimination. Specifically,...more

Snell & Wilmer

Does Your 998 Offer to Compromise Include Attorneys’ Fees and Costs?

Snell & Wilmer on

In California, the “prevailing party” in litigation is generally entitled to recover its costs as a matter of law. See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032. But under California Code of Civil Procedure section 998, a party may make a...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

CAUTION: Unreasonable Denials of Requests for Admission Can Prove Costly

In Grace v. Mansourian, (filed 8/17/2015, order published 9/15/2015, No. G049590) the Fourth District Court of Appeal held a defendant’s denials of plaintiff’s requests for admission were unjustified given the substantial...more

Orrick - Employment Law and Litigation

It Pays to Play: Judge Finds Costs Still Recoverable By Prevailing Employers in FEHA Cases Post-Williams

On May 4, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Williams v. Chino Valley Independent Fire District, holding that unsuccessful FEHA plaintiffs should not be ordered to pay the defendant’s ordinary...more

Nossaman LLP

Court Clarifies Rules for Recovery of Attorneys' Fees in Eminent Domain Actions

Nossaman LLP on

In California eminent domain actions, the parties are required to exchange formal settlement proposals 20 days before trial. If the case proceeds to trial, the property owner may recover litigation expenses if its demand was...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

Law Firm Loses Fee Claim: Total Victory Turns Into Crashing Loss

In David S. Karton, A Law Corporation, v. Dougherty, 2014 DJDAR 15340, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District decided a case with a long, convoluted complex fact pattern under California Code of...more

Miller Starr Regalia

Winners Beware – Fourth District Upholds Trial Court’s Discretion To Drastically Reduce Successful CEQA Plaintiff’s Fees In...

Miller Starr Regalia on

In an opinion filed March 18 and belatedly ordered published on April 13, 2015, the Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld a trial court’s discretion to award only $19,176 in attorneys’ fees under Code of Civil Procedure §...more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide