10 Cited authorities

Williams v. Chino Valley Independent Fire District
61 Cal.4th 97 (Cal. 2015) Cited 147 times 8 Legal Analyses
Concluding rule that prevailing defendant may recover attorney fees only if the plaintiff's "action was objectively groundless" articulated in Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n 434 U.S. 412, 421-422 applicable to costs
B.B. v. Cnty. of Los Ageles
10 Cal.5th 1 (Cal. 2020) Cited 63 times
Holding Civil Code section 1431.2, subdivision does not require reduction of an intentional tortfeasor's liability for noneconomic damages
Ladas v. California State Auto. Assn.
19 Cal.App.4th 761 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993) Cited 117 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding "fees are not authorized for exhibits not used at trial" under section 1033.5, subdivision
Schulz v. Neovi Data Corp.
152 Cal.App.4th 86 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) Cited 64 times
In Schulz, the defendants were four payment processing businesses—Neovi Data Corporation ("Neovi"), Ginix, Inc. ("Ginix"), PaySystems, Inc. ("PaySystems"), and PayPal, Inc. ("PayPal")—accused of violating the UCL by aiding and abetting an illegal online lottery.
Michell v. Olick
49 Cal.App.4th 1194 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) Cited 71 times
Holding that a prevailing party under CCP § 1021 is " entitled to costs as a matter of right; the trial court has no discretion to order each party to bear his or her own costs."
Kesmodel v. Rand
119 Cal.App.4th 1128 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 43 times
Holding apportionment statute that eliminated joint and several liability for non-economic damages inapplicable when "damages caused by joint tortfeasors who act in concert to cause the plaintiffs harm"
Thomas v. Duggins Construction Co., Inc.
139 Cal.App.4th 1105 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) Cited 31 times 4 Legal Analyses
Recognizing deterrence and punishment policy reasons preclude a reduction of an intentional tortfeasor's liability in proportion to the plaintiff's contributory negligence
Weidenfeller v. Star Garter
1 Cal.App.4th 1 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991) Cited 42 times
In Weidenfeller, the plaintiff was the victim of an unprovoked armed assault in the parking lot of a bar. He alleged that the failure to provide adequate lighting and security were substantial factors in causing his injuries.
Moreno v. Bassi
65 Cal.App.5th 244 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021) Cited 6 times
F078400, F078593 06-08-2021 Maria MORENO, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Parmjit Singh BASSI et al., Defendants and Appellants. Maria Moreno, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Parmjit Singh Bassi et al., Defendants and Respondents. California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc., Estella M. Cisneros and Anali Cortez for Plaintiff and Appellant. Law Office of Kevin G. Little and Kevin G. Little, Berkeley, for Defendants, Appellants, and Respondents. FRANSON, Acting P.J. Certified for Partial Publication. Pursuant
Upasani v. State Farm General Ins. Co.
227 Cal.App.4th 509 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) Cited 12 times
Holding that claims including negligence per se and negligent infliction of emotional distress were based only on alleged "nonaccidental, intentional, and purposeful" acts

Ruling on Submitted Matter

10 Cited authorities

Concluding rule that prevailing defendant may recover attorney fees only if the plaintiff's "action was objectively groundless" articulated in Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n 434 U.S. 412, 421-422 applicable to costs

Holding Civil Code section 1431.2, subdivision does not require reduction of an intentional tortfeasor's liability for noneconomic damages

Holding "fees are not authorized for exhibits not used at trial" under section 1033.5, subdivision

In Schulz, the defendants were four payment processing businesses—Neovi Data Corporation ("Neovi"), Ginix, Inc. ("Ginix"), PaySystems, Inc. ("PaySystems"), and PayPal, Inc. ("PayPal")—accused of violating the UCL by aiding and abetting an illegal online lottery.

Holding that a prevailing party under CCP § 1021 is " entitled to costs as a matter of right; the trial court has no discretion to order each party to bear his or her own costs."

Holding apportionment statute that eliminated joint and several liability for non-economic damages inapplicable when "damages caused by joint tortfeasors who act in concert to cause the plaintiffs harm"

Recognizing deterrence and punishment policy reasons preclude a reduction of an intentional tortfeasor's liability in proportion to the plaintiff's contributory negligence

In Weidenfeller, the plaintiff was the victim of an unprovoked armed assault in the parking lot of a bar. He alleged that the failure to provide adequate lighting and security were substantial factors in causing his injuries.

Holding that claims including negligence per se and negligent infliction of emotional distress were based only on alleged "nonaccidental, intentional, and purposeful" acts