Hensley v. Eckerhart
461 U.S. 424 (1983) Cited 21,524 times 7 Legal AnalysesHolding 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
Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
25 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2001) Cited 4,840 times 2 Legal AnalysesConcluding that the gathering and dissemination of pricing information by the petroleum companies through an independent industry service did not imply collusive action where there was no evidence the information was misused as a basis for an unlawful conspiracy; rather, evidence suggested that individual companies used all available resources “to determine capacity, supply, and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits”
Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.
24 Cal.4th 317 (Cal. 2000) Cited 3,243 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."
Ketchum v. Moses
24 Cal.4th 1122 (Cal. 2001) Cited 1,734 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that "the party seeking a fee enhancement bears the burden of proof
Blank v. Kirwan
39 Cal.3d 311 (Cal. 1985) Cited 3,016 timesHolding that the standard for a failure to state a claim is whether "the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"
Schifando v. City of Los Angeles
31 Cal.4th 1074 (Cal. 2003) Cited 1,256 timesDenying request where the materials sought to be judicially noticed were not particularly supportive of the respondent's cause or relevant to the action and noting that "[n]o party has alleged" what the amicus curiae had purported to respond to
Lazar v. Superior Court
12 Cal.4th 631 (Cal. 1996) Cited 1,657 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that justifiable reliance is a required element of a fraud claim
Merrill v. Navegar, Inc.
26 Cal.4th 465 (Cal. 2001) Cited 1,230 times 2 Legal AnalysesRestating the same criteria for exceptions from the rule set forth in section 1714
PLCM Group, Inc. v. Drexler
22 Cal.4th 1084 (Cal. 2000) Cited 1,214 times 2 Legal AnalysesFinding 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
Santisas v. Goodin
17 Cal.4th 599 (Cal. 1998) Cited 1,014 times 6 Legal AnalysesHolding that attorney's fees can be awarded only if provided by contract or authorized by statute
Rule 8.1115 - Citation of opinions
Cal. R. 8.1115 Cited 73,834 times(a) Unpublished opinion Except as provided in (b), an opinion of a California Court of Appeal or superior court appellate division that is not certified for publication or ordered published must not be cited or relied on by a court or a party in any other action. (b)Exceptions An unpublished opinion may be cited or relied on: (1) When the opinion is relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or (2) When the opinion is relevant to a criminal or disciplinary
Rule 3.1702 - Claiming attorney's fees
Cal. R. 3.1702 Cited 326 times(a) Application Except as otherwise provided by statute, this rule applies in civil cases to claims for statutory attorney's fees and claims for attorney's fees provided for in a contract. Subdivisions (b) and (c) apply when the court determines entitlement to the fees, the amount of the fees, or both, whether the court makes that determination because the statute or contract refers to "reasonable" fees, because it requires a determination of the prevailing party, or for other reasons. (b) Attorney's