Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
B323715
|
Simers v. Los Angeles Times Communications LLC
Despite plaintiff's counsel's misconduct leading to the need for another trial, trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding her attorney's fees. |
Attorneys |
|
E. Grimes | Sep. 4, 2024 |
23-15551
|
Berry v. Air Force Central Welfare Fund
Plaintiff could not recover attorneys' fees under the Longshore Act because Defendants paid full amount owed prior to proceeding, so there was no successful prosecution. |
Attorneys, Administrative Agencies |
|
R. Desai | Aug. 30, 2024 |
23-35193
|
Crowe v. Oregon State Bar
Dues-paying bar member established an infringement on his freedom of association after Oregon State Bar's publication of statements antithetical to his views and unrelated to its regulatory purpose. |
Constitutional Law, Attorneys |
|
M. Friedland | Aug. 29, 2024 |
E080594
|
Syre v. Douglas
Denying motion to disqualify counsel was appropriate where prospective client did not provide relevant confidential information to an attorney or demonstrate she would be harmed by the information provided. |
Attorneys |
|
M. Ramirez | Aug. 21, 2024 |
21-55956
|
Grizzell v. San Elijo Elementary School
Non-attorney parent could not proceed without counsel in action brought on her children's behalf. |
Attorneys |
|
K. Wardlaw | Aug. 8, 2024 |
D081851
|
Dickson v. Mann
Law firm had no third-party claim on funds paid under flat fee arrangement despite a provision stating the money was earned on receipt because it had not yet provided any legal services. |
Attorneys |
|
J. Irion | Jul. 22, 2024 |
B333798
|
Southern California Edison Co. v. Superior Court (21st Century Insurance Co.)
Attorney work product generated from investigation as to whether client complied with public reporting statutory requirements was protected by the work product privilege. |
Attorneys |
|
G. Weingart | Jun. 4, 2024 |
A169321
|
Byers v. Superior Court
By putting at issue attorney fees they incurred seeking coverage under their insurance policy, plaintiffs waived the attorney-client privilege as to documents supporting their fees claim. |
Attorneys |
|
T. Jackson | May 8, 2024 |
G061829
|
Masimo Corporation v. The Vanderpool Law Firm, Inc.
Law firm's withdrawal from representation did not insulate it from sanctions for its prior discovery misuse. |
Attorneys |
|
W. Bedsworth | May 6, 2024 |
23-55188
|
Douglas Pell v. Amy Nunez
Law student failed to state a cognizable deprivation of rights under federal law because State Bar's action was merely advisory and without legal significance until approved by California Supreme Court. |
Attorneys, Civil Procedure |
|
S. Ikuta | May 1, 2024 |
22-35876
|
Edmo v. Corizon, Inc.
Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, it was inappropriate to include time spent on prisoner's unsuccessful claims in calculation of lodestar amount when awarding attorneys' fees. |
Attorneys |
|
R. Gould | Apr. 8, 2024 |
B324842
|
Sundholm v. Hollywood Foreign Press Assn.
Plaintiff's counsel was not disqualified because there was no evidence that his review of privileged draft bylaws resulted in a legal disadvantage for defendant. |
Attorneys |
|
G. Feuer | Feb. 29, 2024 |
H049430
|
People v. Ferenz
Defendant could not replace appointed counsel because she provided adequate representation considering the evidence and charges. |
Attorneys |
|
M. Greenwood | Feb. 23, 2024 |
A166490
|
People v. Potter Handy, LLP
Litigation privilege barred district attorneys' unfair competition claims against law firm representing "serial" Americans with Disabilities Act litigants. |
Attorneys |
|
A. Tucher | Dec. 12, 2023 |
20-17316
|
Kohn v. State Bar of California
The California State Bar enjoys Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in federal court. |
Attorneys |
|
J. Owens | Dec. 7, 2023 |
A166176
|
Escamilla v. Vannucci
Trial court did not err in granting defendant attorney's anti-SLAPP motion because malicious prosecution claim was time-barred by one-year statute of limitations. |
Attorneys |
|
W. Getty | Nov. 17, 2023 |
B321566
|
Snoeck v. ExakTime Innovations
Trial court had discretion and did not err in reducing attorney fees because of attorney's incivility. |
Attorneys |
|
A. Egerton | Oct. 27, 2023 |
A166145
|
Doe v. Atkinson
University student who successfully challenged his sexual-violence-based suspension was not entitled to attorney fees for purportedly enforcing an important right affecting the public interest. |
Attorneys |
|
J. Humes | Oct. 23, 2023 |
B324560
|
Modification: Engel v. Pech
Amended complaint adding partnership as plaintiff did not relate back to timely complaint filed by the principal of the LLP because the plaintiffs had separate claims based on distinct facts. |
Attorneys |
|
B. Hoffstadt | Oct. 20, 2023 |
B311524
|
Hansen v. Volkov
Though counsel's behavior was uncivil, civil harassment restraining order was reversed when counsel's conduct was constitutionally protected activity or failed to evidence severe emotional distress. |
Attorneys |
|
D. Perluss | Oct. 5, 2023 |
B324560
|
Engel v. Pech
Amended complaint adding partnership as plaintiff did not relate back to timely complaint filed by the principal of the LLP because the plaintiffs had separate claims based on distinct facts. |
Attorneys |
|
B. Hoffstadt | Oct. 2, 2023 |
22-35471
|
Huffman v. Lindgren
Attorney-litigant's claims that his complaint was merely poorly drafted and was not intended to include federal claims did not justify remand to state court. |
Attorneys |
|
M. McKeown | Sep. 5, 2023 |
B316718
|
Geringer v. Blue Rider Finance
Lawyer's dual role as advocate-witness was not disqualifying where client gave informed consent and there was no evidence of prejudice to the opposing party or injury to the judicial process. |
Attorneys |
|
D. Perluss | Aug. 24, 2023 |
G060579
|
Aresh v. Marin-Morales
Replacement attorney in employment settlement case could not vacate former attorney's settlement lien because the trial court's factual findings on the lien judgment were presumed valid and he was not a party to the case. |
Attorneys |
|
T. Goethals | Jun. 7, 2023 |
B319563
|
Champlin/GEI Wind Holdings, LLC v. Avery
Sanctions were imposed on appellant and his attorney after they pursued a meritless appeal, where appellant's opposition to summary judgment was both untimely and lacking any supporting evidence. |
Attorneys |
|
K. Yegan | Jun. 5, 2023 |
G060912
|
Perry v. Kia Motors America, Inc.
Appellant's counsel forfeited issue by misrepresenting the trial court's findings to the Court of Appeal and omitting from the submitted record comments that expressly contradicted the misrepresentation. |
Attorneys |
|
K. O'Leary | May 25, 2023 |
22-10174
|
U.S. v. Williams
District court improperly disqualified the entire Arizona U.S. Attorney's Office from bringing gang charges based on a conflict of interest involving one Assistant U.S. Attorney. |
Attorneys |
|
P. Bumatay | May 19, 2023 |
A164148
|
Estate of Kempton
Probate court had discretion to approve fee payment directly to a third party who was legally entitled to money owed on a judgment lien against estate administrator. |
Attorneys |
|
J. Streeter | May 9, 2023 |
B313903
|
Modification: Gordon v. Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP
Attorneys could not be liable for malpractice to nonclient third parties in the absence of a clear, certain, and undisputed intent on the part of the client to benefit them. |
Attorneys |
|
B. Hoffstadt | Mar. 22, 2023 |
H048130
|
Padideh v. Moradi
Plaintiff's malicious prosecution claim was barred by the unclean hands doctrine where the lies by omission in her deposition caused the other side to not pursue certain legal actions. |
Attorneys |
|
H. Williams | Mar. 21, 2023 |