ETHICS & ATTORNEY'S FEES CASES

• Radvansky v. Olmsted Falls
• Park Manor, Ltd, v. US Dep't of Health and Human Servs.
• Roadway Express, Inc. v. US Dep't of Labor, Admin. Review Bd.
• Emergency Med. Servs., Inc. v. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co.
• Ollis v. HearthStone Homes, Inc.
• Golden Pisces, Inc. v. Fred Wahl Marine Constr., Inc.
• Petrone v. Malone
• Miller Buckfire & Co., LLC v. Citation Corp.
• Performance Plastering v. Richmond Am. Homes of Cal., Inc.
• In re Jasmine S.
• Musaelian v. Adams
• Sherwood Partners, Inc. v. EOP-Marina Bus. Ctr., L.L.C.

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 27, 2007
Radvansky v. Olmsted Falls, No. 06-3357
In a suit against police officers under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 alleging violation of plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights, judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the jury heard testimony sufficient to support its conclusion that the officers arrested plaintiff with probable cause; 2) jury instructions were not confusing, misleading, or prejudicial, and the jury's responses to the interrogatories suggest it understood the applicable law; 3) there was no inconsistency in the jury's interrogatory responses; and 4) partial success on an earlier appeal did not make plaintiff a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 23, 2007
Park Manor, Ltd, v. US Dep't of Health and Human Servs., No. 06-3521
Petition for review is denied after an agency decision to deny attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act for the challenger in a challenge to sanctions imposed on a nursing home by defendant-agency where: 1) there was substantial justification for charges against petitioner that the agency later dropped; and 2) the petitioner prevailed in the remaining proceedings. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 25, 2007
Roadway Express, Inc. v. US Dep't of Labor, Admin. Review Bd., No. 06-1873
Petition for review of an ALJ decision in favor of an employee alleging retaliation for testifying in support of a fellow employee's grievance against petitioner is denied where: 1) the testimony was protected under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act; 2) there was substantial evidence to support a finding that the petitioner's decisionmaker knew of the testimony; 3) a discovery sanction did not violate due process; and 4) the sanction was not disproportionately harsh. The petition is granted where the Board abused its discretion in extending the discovery sanction to the remedial stage. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 26, 2007
Emergency Med. Servs., Inc. v. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co., No. 05-3859
In a suit to recover the costs of defending a personal injury and medical malpractice suit from an insurance carrier, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) an emotional distress claim fell under the policy language because it referenced physical injuries alleged elsewhere in the complaint; 2) the source of the injuries qualified as an "event" under the policy language; 3) the claims did not fit under any exclusion language in the policy; 4) the insurance company was not prejudiced by a delay in notice; 5) attorney's fees were appropriate; and 6) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying prejudgment interest. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 27, 2007
Ollis v. HearthStone Homes, Inc., No. 06-2852
In a suit alleging religious discrimination and retaliatory discharge after an employee expressed discomfort with the religious leanings of his employer, denial of defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law is affirmed where there was a sufficient evidentiary basis for a jury to find in favor of plaintiff, and the district court properly awarded and calculated attorney's fees for plaintiff. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 24, 2007
Golden Pisces, Inc. v. Fred Wahl Marine Constr., Inc., No. 05-35477
In a breach of contract suit regarding repairs to a ship, denial of plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees is affirmed where, under the American Rule, which applies in maritime litigation, plaintiffs are not entitled to attorneys' fees absent statutory authorization, an enforceable contractual provision, or an equitable exception to the rule. Since none of those elements were present, the district court properly denied plaintiffs' motion. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 25, 2007
Petrone v. Malone, No. 05-17393
In a class action on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased publicly traded securities of VERITAS Software Corp., an order of the district court approving a settlement and plan of allocation is reversed where the notice of proposed settlement sent to the class did not comply with the requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. Denial of attorney's fees for plaintiff-appellant is affirmed where the application for fees was untimely. Read more...

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 26, 2007
Miller Buckfire & Co., LLC v. Citation Corp., No. 06-15108
Order reversing bankruptcy court's order awarding an adjusted fee for the investment banking services of defendant, and affirming bankruptcy court's finding that defendant's failure to disclose potential conflicts did not violate Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2014 or harm the bankruptcy estate, is reversed in part where the district court erred by concluding the bankruptcy court improperly considered a reasonable lodestar in calculating defendant's attorney fees, and to the extent the district court found the bankruptcy court had considered whether defendant's conduct violated Rule 2014. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 24, 2007
Performance Plastering v. Richmond Am. Homes of Cal., Inc., No. C052768
In case involving contract dispute between home builder, a subcontractor, and the subcontractor's insurer, regarding alleged violation of El Nino and Air Design settlement agreements, sustaining of demurrer based on plaintiff subcontractor being a suspended corporation and insurer lacking standing is reversed where the insurer was a party to the Air Design settlement agreement and was a third party beneficiary of the El Nino settlement agreements. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 25, 2007
In re Jasmine S., No. B194714
The juvenile court's disqualification of a unit of the Children's Law Center of Los Angeles involved in the concurrent representation of two siblings with potentially adverse interests is reversed where an attorney representing multiple siblings in dependency proceedings may be disqualified only if the siblings have an actual, present conflict of interest. A mere potential conflict does not warrant disqualification. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 26, 2007
Musaelian v. Adams, No. A112906
Award of sanctions against appellant trial counsel for plaintiff in favor of defendants is reversed as under Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7, attorney fees cannot be awarded as sanctions to an attorney representing himself. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 27, 2007
Sherwood Partners, Inc. v. EOP-Marina Bus. Ctr., L.L.C., No. B189590
In case where an assignee for the benefit of the creditors of an insolvent entity filed suit against tenant's landlord for return of tenant's security deposit, judgment for defendant and grant of costs and attorney fees is reversed as plaintiff assignee cannot be personally liable for the award of attorney fees pursuant to the written lease between defendant and tenant. Read more...