Search anything: case name, case number, motion type, judge, or party

51-75 of 286 results

BOBBY NUNEZ ET AL VS 10500 SOUTH VERMONT LLC

Discussion Here, Plaintiff is entitled to attorneysfees pursuant to the Los Angeles Municipal Code (“LAMC”) § 151.10(a) as the prevailing party.

  • Hearing

    Apr 03, 2019

ORLANDO RIVERA ET AL VS AESTHETIC MAINTENANCE CORPORATION

On May 13, 2016, plaintiffs each filed a notice of acceptance of Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offer to compromise. On August 29, 2016, plaintiffs filed the instant motion or attorneysfees. Defendant opposes. The Court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers, and GRANTS the motion with modifications as follows. Entitlement / Prevailing Party Plaintiffs seek reimbursement of the attorneysfees under Labor Code sections 218.5, 226, and 1194.

  • Hearing

    Sep 27, 2016

ALICE KIM VS HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA ET AL

Discussion Here, it is undisputed that Plaintiff is entitled to attorneysfees pursuant to the Song Beverly Act. As the prevailing party, Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable fees. Plaintiff requests a total fee award of $25,899.33, accounting for $20,225.15 actually incurred, a multiplier of .25 amounting to $5,056.25, and costs for $617.93. Defendant provides specific objections to certain items of billing, counsel’s rates, and other specific objections.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

BARBARA AGNIHOTRI VS. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

The Court also agrees with Qualcomm that even if Qualcomm had not made a CCP 998 Offer, the FEHA provides for the recovery of costs by the prevailing party in actions brought under its provisions. Specifically, California Government Code section 12965(b) provides that: "In actions brought under this section, the court, in its discretion, may award to the prevailing party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs . .. " Cal. Gov. Code§ 12965(b) Under Williams v. Chino Valley Independent Fire.

  • Hearing

    Feb 14, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

FIKE VS MAI

Whatever award Mai receives will be the same as that specified in Robinson's CCP § 998 offer (i.e., "[s]tatutory attorneys' fees, and costs to date as allowed by law and determined by the Court pursuant to a Motion(s) for Fees and Costs, and a corresponding Motion(s) to Tax Fees and Costs and/or Opposition to the Motion(s) for Fees and Costs, and the Reply thereto").

  • Hearing

    Oct 17, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FIKE VS MAI

Whatever award Mai receives will be the same as that specified in Robinson's CCP § 998 offer (i.e., "[s]tatutory attorneys' fees, and costs to date as allowed by law and determined by the Court pursuant to a Motion(s) for Fees and Costs, and a corresponding Motion(s) to Tax Fees and Costs and/or Opposition to the Motion(s) for Fees and Costs, and the Reply thereto").

  • Hearing

    Oct 17, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

SWIFTAIR VS. ROW 44,INC. ET. AL.

Additionally, the content provider agreement between SwiftAir and defendant Row 44 provides “[i]n the event that any dispute between the parties should result in litigation, arbitration, or mediation the prevailing party in such dispute shall be entitled to recover from the other party all reasonable fees, costs and expenses of enforcing any right of the prevailing party, including reasonable attorneysfees and expenses[.]” D’Arche Decl., Ex. C.

  • Hearing

    Feb 28, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CASCELLA VS SCRIPPS HEALTH

Based on the 998 offer accepted by Plaintiff, Plaintiff, the prevailing party, has brought a motion to recover her reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. Initially, the Court notes that it did not believe Attorney Jones' declaration in support of the motion provided a sufficient description of the services performed for the Court to determine the reasonableness of the fees request or of the costs sought. However, in opposing the motion, Defendants submitted Ms.

  • Hearing

    Apr 05, 2018

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

WILLIAM MCCULLOUGH VS. FCA US LLC

The SOD concluded with the following observations: "Plaintiff is the prevailing party. Plaintiff is entitled to file a memorandum of costs and a motion for reasonable attorneys' fees. [As already noted, plaintiff was not present, but during the trial he had three or four lawyers at counsel table plus one or two more in the gallery. Only one lawyer (Mr. Wirtz) examined witnesses and argued the case.] The court will take this into account in analyzing attorneys' fees. See 569 East County Boulevard LLC v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 27, 2017

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

HAMMER LANE RV & MINI-STORAGE LP VS. HLMS LLC

NATURE OF PROCEEDING: MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF PREVAILING PARTY AND FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS TENTATIVE RULING: The motion of plaintiffs, Hammer Land R.V. & Mini-Storage, LP, et al. ("Plaintiffs"), for an award of attorneys' fees and costs against defendants pursuant to Civil Code section 1717, and Code of Civil Procedure sections 998, 1032 and 1033.5, is granted in part, denied in part, and denied in part without prejudice, as set forth below.

  • Hearing

    Aug 08, 2013

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

HAMMER LANE RV & MINI-STORAGE LP VS. HLMS LLC

NATURE OF PROCEEDING: MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF PREVAILING PARTY AND FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS TENTATIVE RULING: The motion of plaintiffs, Hammer Land R.V. & Mini-Storage, LP, et al. ("Plaintiffs"), for an award of attorneys' fees and costs against defendants pursuant to Civil Code section 1717, and Code of Civil Procedure sections 998, 1032 and 1033.5, is granted in part, denied in part, and denied in part without prejudice, as set forth below.

  • Hearing

    Aug 08, 2013

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

HAMMER LANE RV & MINI-STORAGE LP VS. HLMS LLC

NATURE OF PROCEEDING: MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF PREVAILING PARTY AND FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS TENTATIVE RULING: The motion of plaintiffs, Hammer Land R.V. & Mini-Storage, LP, et al. ("Plaintiffs"), for an award of attorneys' fees and costs against defendants pursuant to Civil Code section 1717, and Code of Civil Procedure sections 998, 1032 and 1033.5, is granted in part, denied in part, and denied in part without prejudice, as set forth below.

  • Hearing

    Aug 08, 2013

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

HAMMER LANE RV & MINI-STORAGE LP VS. HLMS LLC

NATURE OF PROCEEDING: MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF PREVAILING PARTY AND FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS TENTATIVE RULING: The motion of plaintiffs, Hammer Land R.V. & Mini-Storage, LP, et al. ("Plaintiffs"), for an award of attorneys' fees and costs against defendants pursuant to Civil Code section 1717, and Code of Civil Procedure sections 998, 1032 and 1033.5, is granted in part, denied in part, and denied in part without prejudice, as set forth below.

  • Hearing

    Aug 08, 2013

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

ROBINSON V. ARSHI

Per CCP §1032(a)(4), a prevailing party includes the party with a net monetary recovery. Here, the court finds plaintiff was the prevailing party. In this action a main issue submitted to the court for determination was the amount owed on a promissory note. Plaintiff did not dispute something was owed on the note. He only sought determination of the amount owed. Throughout trial, defendant Arshi maintained that $77,512 was owed on the note.

  • Hearing

    Feb 22, 2019

GEBASE AUTOMOTIVE VS WESTERN TITANIUM INC

The motion for attorneys' fees is granted to the following extent. Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action given that he prevailed against defendant on all of his claims involving the subject premises and defeated all of defendant's claims. Thus, plaintiff, the prevailing party, is entitled to recover attorneys' fees under Civil Code section 1717, Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, and paragraph 31 of the subject Lease.

  • Hearing

    Dec 06, 2017

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

GEBASE AUTOMOTIVE VS WESTERN TITANIUM INC

The motion for attorneys' fees is granted to the following extent. Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action given that he prevailed against defendant on all of his claims involving the subject premises and defeated all of defendant's claims. Thus, plaintiff, the prevailing party, is entitled to recover attorneys' fees under Civil Code section 1717, Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, and paragraph 31 of the subject Lease.

  • Hearing

    Dec 06, 2017

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

GEBASE AUTOMOTIVE VS WESTERN TITANIUM INC

The motion for attorneys' fees is granted to the following extent. Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action given that he prevailed against defendant on all of his claims involving the subject premises and defeated all of defendant's claims. Thus, plaintiff, the prevailing party, is entitled to recover attorneys' fees under Civil Code section 1717, Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, and paragraph 31 of the subject Lease.

  • Hearing

    Dec 06, 2017

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

PROMENADE MALL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. P.B. ROMA'S INC (IMAGED)

Plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees ($371,042.00) pursuant to paragraph 20 of the Lease, trial Ex. 1, which provides that the "prevailing party" in "any legal action...based on this Lease" "shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys' fees and such other costs as the court deems proper." The moving papers are ROA 182-188. Defendant filed opposition. ROA 193. Plaintiff filed reply. ROA 194-196. The court has reviewed the papers. 2. Defendant's motion to tax costs. The cost bill is ROA 176-177.

  • Hearing

    May 03, 2017

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

RACHEL BLANEY VS, JANNA WEIR, ET AL

In the event that no party requests oral argument in accordance with Rule 1.10(B), the prevailing party shall prepare an order consistent with the announced ruling as required by Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 1.11. NOTE: If oral argument is requested, the argument will be held on February 10, 2020, at 1:30 p.m. in Department E.

  • Hearing

    Feb 07, 2020

PROMENADE MALL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. P.B. ROMA'S INC (IMAGED)

Plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees ($371,042.00) pursuant to paragraph 20 of the Lease, trial Ex. 1, which provides that the "prevailing party" in "any legal action...based on this Lease" "shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys' fees and such other costs as the court deems proper." The moving papers are ROA 182-188. Defendant filed opposition. ROA 193. Plaintiff filed reply. ROA 194-196. The court has reviewed the papers. 2. Defendant's motion to tax costs. The cost bill is ROA 176-177.

  • Hearing

    May 03, 2017

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

CARDAMONE VS STANLEY BLACK & DECKER INC

Plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees is granted in part. Labor Code § 218.5(a). Plaintiff seeks attorneys' fees pursuant to Labor Code § 218.5(a).

  • Hearing

    Jan 24, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

YVES CLEMENT VS. US GRANT HOTEL VENTURES LLC

The parties both seek to recover their respective attorneys' fees pursuant to the following provision in the parties' "Agreement for Lease of Art Work" (Agreement): If any legal action or other proceeding is brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and other costs incurred in the action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which the prevailing party may be entitled.

  • Hearing

    Jan 16, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ARTHUR SCOTT VS THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO

For the reasons set forth herein, the court, in exercising its discretion, finds attorneys' fees of $33,735.00 reasonable and awards Plaintiff attorneys' fees on appeal in this amount.

  • Hearing

    Nov 14, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

BRITTANY EMBRY, ET AL. VS NED BASSIN, ET AL.

The judgment entered by the Court states that “Defendants Ned and Rosalind Bassin are ordered to pay Plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys fees and costs, as the prevailing party, pursuant to Plaintiffs timely filing of a Memorandum of Costs and appropriate motions.” (12/06/19 Judgment, p. 5.) Defendants do not dispute that Plaintiffs are the prevailing party and state that Plaintiffs “are therefore entitled to reasonable attorneysfees and costs pursuant to the governing statutory authority.”

  • Hearing

    Jan 27, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

BLUE MOUNTAIN ENTER., LLC V. OWEN, ET AL.

Defendants Owen and Silvermark are not prevailing parties. 4) Defendant Owen’s motion for contractual attorneysfees under the Membership Agreement is denied based upon the finding that BME is the prevailing party under Civil Code, § 1717. 5) Defendant Owen’s motion for attorneysfees pursuant to the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act is denied. 6) Plaintiff BME’s motion for attorneysfees is granted in part.

  • Hearing

    Oct 04, 2019

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 12     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.