Gorman v. Tassajara Development Corp.
178 Cal.App.4th 44 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 328 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that meals are not recoverable under Cal. Civ. P.Code § 1033.5.
Fassberg Constr. Co. v. Housing Auth. of City of Los Angeles
152 Cal.App.4th 720 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 229 timesHolding that the plain meaning of the statute only awarded civil penalties for claims, not statements
Jones v. Dumrichob
63 Cal.App.4th 1258 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998) Cited 153 timesFinding no abuse of discretion in awarding expert fees pursuant to a section 998 offer consisting of a cost waiver, but no monetary amount
Blanton v. Womancare, Inc.
38 Cal.3d 396 (Cal. 1985) Cited 207 timesFinding party did not ratify counsel's act where she "immediately" fired her attorney and hired new counsel to set aside previous attorney's act
Linthicum v. Butterfield
175 Cal.App.4th 259 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 68 times 2 Legal AnalysesIn Linthicum the court had affirmed a judgment imposing an equitable easement to access "landlocked" property where the owner thereof had been using a roadway over neighboring property for several decades.
McKenzie v. Ford Motor Co.
238 Cal.App.4th 695 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) Cited 43 timesReversing denial of fees incurred following rejection of § 998 offer, where the plaintiff acted reasonably in rejecting the offer
El Dorado Meat Co. v. Yosemite Meat and Locker Service, Inc.
150 Cal.App.4th 612 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) Cited 56 timesAffirming trial court's allowance of costs incurred in creating an exhibit summarizing important financial data, and observing that "[t]he idea that the cost is not allowable because the exhibit could have been created using adding machines, ledger paper, and pencils instead of an electronic database is antiquated"
Staples v. Hoefke
189 Cal.App.3d 1397 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987) Cited 102 times 1 Legal AnalysesRejecting the appellants argument that fees should not have been awarded under § 1717 because respondents insurance carrier paid the attorney fees
Ignacio v. Caracciolo
2 Cal.App.5th 81 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016) Cited 36 times 1 Legal AnalysesIn Ignacio, the Court of Appeal concluded a statutory offer containing an "incredibly broad" release provision, "encompass[ing] numerous claims the releasers may have against the releasees beyond those at issue in the lawsuit," was not valid under section 998. (Ignacio, at p. 88, 206 Cal.Rptr.3d 76.)
Levy v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.
4 Cal.App.4th 807 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992) Cited 77 timesAffirming taxation of costs, where memorandum listed "other expenses authorized by statute and case law per declaration," declaration did not address them, and party did not substantiate them after objection; presuming the "court, in its sound discretion, found that the charges were excessive"
Section 1542 - Claims not known by creditor at time of executing release
Cal. Civ. Code § 1542 Cited 1,698 times 10 Legal AnalysesProviding that a general release does not extend to unknown claims