§Why CasetextPricing

Jessica Gibson vs. Benz Boyz

Motion for Attorney Fees

10 Cited authorities

  1. Hensley v. Eckerhart

    461 U.S. 424 (1983)   Cited 22,159 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding a civil-rights plaintiff can recover attorney's fees for claims that "involve a common core of facts or will be based on related legal theories," even if only one of those claims arises under a fee-shifting statute

  2. Ketchum v. Moses

    24 Cal.4th 1122 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 1,775 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the party seeking a fee enhancement bears the burden of proof

  3. Moreno v. Sacramento

    534 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 1,318 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may impose a discretionary 10 percent "haircut"

  4. PLCM Group, Inc. v. Drexler

    22 Cal.4th 1084 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 1,239 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding no error in awarding "prevailing market rate for comparable legal services in San Francisco, where counsel is located" in a case heard in Los Angeles

  5. Van Gerwen v. Guarantee Mut. Life Co.

    214 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 715 times
    Holding that district courts should not include hours that are "excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary"

  6. Weeks v. Baker McKenzie

    63 Cal.App.4th 1128 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 201 times
    Finding "evidence that persons who complained [about employee's sexual harassment] actions were transferred or were themselves terminated as employees" supported a finding that employer did not "take misconduct seriously" and consciously disregarded the rights of others

  7. Press v. Lucky Stores, Inc.

    34 Cal.3d 311 (Cal. 1983)   Cited 253 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the trial court has discretion to determine whether a "significant benefit" to the public has been obtained, justifying fees on a private attorney general theory

  8. Moore v. Jas. H. Matthews Co.

    682 F.2d 830 (9th Cir. 1982)   Cited 185 times
    Adopting a lodestar compensation approach based on the fixing of a reasonable rate of hourly compensation

  9. Mandel v. Lackner

    92 Cal.App.3d 747 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979)   Cited 32 times

    Docket No. 42070. May 4, 1979. Appeal from Superior Court of Alameda County, No. 427816, Robert L. Bostick, Judge. COUNSEL Evelle J. Younger, George Deukmejian, Attorneys General, John J. Klee, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Charlton G. Holland III, Asher Rubin and Edward P. Hill, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Appellants. Richard M. Kaplan, Ephraim Margolin and Nicholas Arguimbau for Plaintiff and Respondent. Antonio Rossmann, John E. McDermott, Robert T. Olmos, Patricia M. Tenoso

  10. Prudential Petroleum Co. v. Peck

    132 Cal.App. 4 (Cal. Ct. App. 1933)   Cited 3 times

    Docket No. 7730. May 15, 1933. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Douglas L. Edmonds, Judge. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Samuel W. Newman and Eugene D. Williams for Appellant. Barker Keithly and Barker, Smiley Keithly for Respondents. ARCHBALD, J., pro tem. A demurrer to plaintiff's third amended complaint for the recovery of an unpaid stock subscription was sustained without leave to amend, and plaintiff has appealed from the judgment