California Attorney's Fees

Latest from California Attorney's Fees

South Gate Did Not Need To Pray For Fees In The Initial Cross-Complaint Not Including A Public Nuisance Cross-Claim—The First Amended Cross-Complaint Was The Trigger, Which Did Include A Public Nuisance Claim And Prayer For Fee Recovery.

After winning a…

That Determination Depends On A Future Fee Motion On Whether Entitlement Is Established—Not So, Ultimately In This Case.

In WCST Enterprises, LLC v. Ling, Case No. G065236 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 28, 2026) (published), the dispute involved neighbors…

Unfairly Shackling Client On Key Decisions And Unconscionable Arrangements Likely Will Be Under Scrutiny.

Although it has not yet been adopted and remains open for public comment, the California State Bar’s Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct has issued…

998 Offer Allowed For Costs/Fees to Plaintiff, Such That This Could Not Be “Double Dipped” Added To The Base 998 Offer Amount; Otherwise, Duplication Existed.

Slater v. Ford Motor Co., Case No. G064350 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 24,…

Lodestar, Not Contingency Fee Agreement Amount, Governed Work On Section 496(c) Work, Requiring A Remand On That Sole Issue.

Siry Investments, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour, Case No. B340681 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 23, 2026) (unpublished) involved a long-ranging dispute between…

Nothing In The Civil Code Provided Fee Entitlement.

In T McGee Electric, Inc. v. FH II Homebuilders, Inc., Case No. D088372 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 22, 2026) (unpublished), defendants general contractor and property owner obtained a clarification order…