§Why CasetextPricing

Diversified Medical Records Services, Inc. vs. Chartsquad, LLC

Reply to Opposition

9 Cited authorities

  1. Hensley v. Eckerhart

    461 U.S. 424 (1983)   Cited 21,669 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. Hughes v. Rowe

    449 U.S. 5 (1980)   Cited 6,635 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that pleadings drafted by pro se litigants should be held to a lesser standard than those drafted by lawyers since "[a]n unrepresented litigant should not be punished for his failure to recognize subtle factual or legal deficiencies in his claims"

  3. PLCM Group, Inc. v. Drexler

    22 Cal.4th 1084 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 1,223 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

  4. ComputerXpress, Inc. v. Jackson

    93 Cal.App.4th 993 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 641 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff "failed to establish probability of success under California's anti-SLAPP statute on abuse of process claim because plaintiff alleged misuse of administrative process of Federal Communications Commission rather than abuse of judicial process"

  5. Mann v. Quality Old Time Services Inc.

    139 Cal.App.4th 328 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 176 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "a party who partially prevails on an anti-SLAPP motion must generally be considered a prevailing party unless the results of the motion were so insignificant that the party did not achieve any practical benefit from bringing the motion"

  6. City of Colton v. Singletary

    206 Cal.App.4th 751 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 136 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Affirming attorney fee award to party whose anti-SLAPP motion obtained a "'significant victory'" by "'prevent[ing] the City from compelling [him] to undertake significant construction and work'"

  7. Rosenaur v. Scherer

    88 Cal.App.4th 260 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 132 times
    Holding that an attorney was entitled to recover his fees even though he had waived payment from the client but not if the payment came from another source, such as an insurance company

  8. Lin v. the City of Pleasanton

    175 Cal.App.4th 1143 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 32 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting conclusion that anti-SLAPP motion must be denied when the trial court would have sustained demurrer to same cause of action

  9. Crawford v. Meadows

    55 Cal.App. 4 (Cal. Ct. App. 1921)   Cited 12 times

    Civ. No. 3746. November 1, 1921. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Imperial County. Phil D. Swing, Judge. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Thomas A. Sanson and James L. Allen for Appellant. Samuel J. Crawford and Alfred J. MacDonald for Respondent. SHAW, J. — This is an appeal from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff, and from orders denying defendant's motions for relief from default in preparing her record for use on appeal. It appears that this action