A man was falsely accused of sexual activity and held to answer after a preliminary hearing during which a fabricated lab report was used as evidence. After the charges were dismissed, the man sued a City and a police officer for violation of his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Immediately prior to trial, the parties settled the dispute and the man sought attorney fees in the amount of $1,448,397 based on 2,249.9 hours of compensable attorney hours and costs of $72,255. The trial court awarded $436,807.50 for fees and $23,935.07 for costs.
“The Primary Purpose . . . Was To Ruin [Former Husband And His New Wife] Financially.” The Trial Court.
The trial court ordered a former wife to pay her former husband $151,967 and his new wife $124,352 both as sanctions under Family Code section 271 and to pay for their attorney fees pursuant to Family Code section 2030. The trial court described the proceedings as a “morass of litigation, the primary purpose of which was to ruin [former husband and his new wife] financially.”
Proving And Defending Against The Cost Of Health Care.
In a personal injury case, a jury found defendant negligent and awarded $261,713.71 for past medical expenses. Plaintiff had no medical insurance, and her medical providers rendered service to her on a lien basis. However, a third party purchased the lien for a discounted amount, although plaintiff remained liable for the total amount.
Default Judgment Void & Statement Of Damages Rejected In Non-P.I. Default.
After a business relationship went south, plaintiff filed a complaint for damages in 2004. The prayer was for general and special damages according to proof. Default was entered in 2005. A statement of damages alleging damages for over $2 million was filed and served, and at the prove-up hearing, the trial court awarded almost that much.
$32,500,000 Punitive Damages Award Reversed.
Plaintiffs are the survivors and the estate of a decedent who suffered from mesothelioma as a result of his exposure to asbestos. The jury awarded various amounts to the survivors and the estate, and also awarded the estate $32,500,000 in punitive damages. With regard to the testimony about defendant Borg-Warner Morse TEC INC’s [BWMT] financial […]
$3,751,969 Personal Injury Verdict Affirmed.
In a special verdict, a jury found two defendant motorists were negligent but concluded only one of them was a substantial factor is causing injuries to a bicyclist on a sidewalk. Thus, only one of the defendants was held responsible for plaintiff’s personal injury verdict of $3,751,969 in damages. On appeal the defendant who was […]
Trial Court Erred In Not Granting Rescission To Buyer Or Real Property.
Plaintiffs bought a multimillion-dollar hillside home, and several months later, they discovered they were not connected to the City’s sewer system. Believing they were deceived, they brought an action against the sellers and the real estate agents who brokered the sale alleging various causes of action, including rescission. After the real estate agents settled for […]
Statement Of Damages Doesn’t Count When It’s Not An Action For Personal Injury Or Wrongful Death.
Plaintiff sued for retaliation in violation of various Labor Code statutes. The complaint, itself specified only a civil penalty of $10,000 but did not otherwise specify the amount of damages. On the other hand, the statement of damages prayed for many zeroes. A default judgment for $129,673.48 plus costs and attorney fees was entered against […]
Penalties Not Elements Of Causes Of Action That Need To Be Proven To Prevail On Summary Judgment.
The City of Los Angeles sought an abatement of a public nuisance against operators of medical marijuana clinics who were violating the law. One of the remedies sought by the City was an award of civil penalties. The trial court denied the City’s motion for summary judgment and summary adjudication, basing its ruling on its […]
Pyrrhic Victory Against Nursing Facility.
In a wrongful death action against a skilled nursing facility, the jury found for the facility with regard to the health care issues. But the jury found for the daughter of the deceased on a health care records issues. It found the facility did not provide 1) “complete and accurate health records” and 2) “meaningful […]
- Next Page »