Saleen cars look awesome! Too bad the one in this case (not as pictured) only drove for 50 miles than died. Civil Code §1717 has a mutuality component. The defendant was added as an alter ego of a debtor under a Riverside Superior Court judgment, but was found to NOT be the alter ego. Therefore,
Malicious prosecution requires a favorable termination that ALSO reflects on the innocence of the party. (Roche v. Hyde (6/30/2020)
I see this case more as a discovery matter and a lesson for lawyers and clients not to lie. But it also stands for malicious prosecution, a favorable termination requires more than a dismissal of the underlying action. The person wrongfully sued who has prevailed must show a favorable termination on the merits that reflects
Los Angeles Superior Court Status Update April 24, 2020: No Civil Trials Until September or Later!
LOS ANGELES (Updated April 24): “All civil trials scheduled to begin for the period March 17 through June 17 have been or will be continued by General Order. Because civil jury and non-jury trials are not included in the enumerated time-sensitive essential functions set out in these General Orders, they will be continued, or
Covid-19: Court is limiting all Evictions Unless the Public Safety is at risk
The current law is only staying evictions or unlawful detainer actions for non-payment of rent. Please read this memo: Letter re COVID-19 – UD
Civil trials will probably be continued until after June 1st. The backlog will force most civil trials to be continued for months after that. Most civil court hearings will be continued
$1,200 per hour attorney fee is reasonable per L.A. County Judge Fahey!
Trial courts have great discretion as to determining what is a reasonable attorney fee. Some judges look at what is a “market rate” and for high end clients they will pay $1,200 per hour. In an unpublished opinion, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge William Fahey awarded attorney’s fees in favor of Latham Watkins, Gibson Dunn
Attorneys must disclose if they do not have malpractice insurance or risk not being paid! (Rules of Professional Conduct, 1.4.2 (formerly Rule 3-410)
The plaintiffs’ attorneys in a class action were denied attorney’s fees because some of the attorneys failed to disclose their lack of professional liability insurance to the client at the time the client retained the attorney. The Court of Appeal concluded the agreement was unenforceable because of failure to comply with former rule 3-410 and
Mediation Fees May be Awarded as Costs after Trial (Berkeley Cement, Inc. v. Regents of the Univ. of California (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1153)
In Berkeley Cement, Inc. v. Regents of the Univ. of California (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1153, the court confirmed that a trial court may award mediation fees as costs, whether the mediation is court ordered or privately agreed to. In affirming the award of mediation fees as costs, Berkeley Cement noted that although mediation costs are
No waiver of jury trial even if willfully disobey Court’s Order re jury trial preparation (Guo Zhang Chen v. Lin (Cal. App. Dep’t Super. Ct., Nov. 14, 2019, No. BV 033055)
Waiver of the right to a jury trial cannot be imposed as a sanction. In a Los Angeles unlawful detainer action, the pro per tenant (who was also pro per on appeal) appeared on the trial date without complying with a Los Angeles County Superior Court Civil Division unlawful detainer standing order. The court found
Online Services Cannot Discriminate by their Terms of Use (White v. Square, Inc. S249248 (August 12, 2019))
In White v. Square, Inc. S249248 (August 12, 2019), the California Supreme Court held that an online business violated the Unruh Act by discriminating based upon occupation (or other protected categories of people) and the discriminated person has standing to sue even if the person did not enter into a contract for the services because
A Stipulated Judgment Can Be an Unenforceable Penalty (Use an incentive for a discount, not an increase if a default (Red & White Distribution v. Osteroid Enterprises (2019)
A stipulated judgment constituted an unenforceable penalty under Civil Code §1671(b) where the stipulated judgment for $2.8 million bore no reasonable relationship to the range of actual damages the parties could have anticipated from a breach of their agreement to settle a dispute for $2.1 million. (This is established law under Ridgley v. Topa Thrift