19 Cited authorities

  1. Thayer v. Wells Fargo Bank

    92 Cal.App.4th 819 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 154 times
    Reversing trial court's fee enhancement because there was no justification for increasing the lodestar award
  2. Kurwa v. Kislinger

    57 Cal.4th 1097 (Cal. 2013)   Cited 109 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Kurwa, our Supreme Court agreed, observing that a dismissal without prejudice unaccompanied by a stipulation to waive the statute is, in fact, sufficiently final.
  3. Sierra Club v. San Joaquin Local Agency Form. Commn

    21 Cal.4th 489 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 106 times
    Acknowledging the existence of “ ‘narrow exceptions to the general rule’ ”
  4. California Crane School, Inc. v. National Commission for Certification of Crane Operators

    226 Cal.App.4th 12 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 64 times
    Discussing the doctrine
  5. Wells v. Marina City Properties, Inc.

    29 Cal.3d 781 (Cal. 1981)   Cited 150 times
    In Wells, the California Supreme Court stated that the res judicata effect of a judgment of dismissal is limited where a trial court sustains a demurrer with leave to amend and the plaintiff declines to file an amended complaint.
  6. Guseinov v. Burns

    145 Cal.App.4th 944 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 69 times
    Concluding “substantial evidence supported the trial court's conclusion that disclosure was not required”
  7. Christensen v. Dewor Developments

    33 Cal.3d 778 (Cal. 1983)   Cited 132 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding prejudice because "[i]n addition to the fact that defendants incurred nearly $ 300 in court costs and over $ 2,000 in attorney's fees, the lengthy nature of the delays associated with plaintiffs' abortive attempt at litigation has, we are told, resulted in faded memories and lost records by subcontractors"
  8. Conservatorship of Estate of McQueen

    59 Cal.4th 602 (Cal. 2014)   Cited 45 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Distinguishing the separate statutory basis for each award
  9. S.T v. Superior Court

    177 Cal.App.4th 1009 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 41 times
    Stating that “ trial court's failure to exercise its discretion generally requires reversal,” and that “ffimance is possible only if the appellate court can conclude the appellant suffered no prejudice either because it would have been an abuse of discretion to rule in the appellant's favor or because it is not reasonably probable that the appellant would have obtained a more favorable result had the court exercised its discretion”
  10. Don Jose's Restaurant, Inc. v. Truck Ins. Exchange

    53 Cal.App.4th 115 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 49 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Don Jose's, the trial court granted the defendants' motion for summary adjudication on only two of the plaintiffs' 11 causes of action, and the parties then stipulated that pending plaintiffs' appeal from the order, the remaining counts would be dismissed without prejudice and the defendants would waive all applicable statutes of limitations.
  11. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,146 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or