News & Analysis as of

Attorney's Fees Business Disputes

Farrell Fritz, P.C.

“Prevailing Party” Attorneys’ Fee Provisions

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

Contracts with “prevailing party” provisions offer the tantalizing, coveted prospect of the winner recovering attorneys’ fees from the loser in legal disputes over the contract’s enforcement....more

Farrell Fritz, P.C.

Two Cases. Two Mammoth Fee Awards. Coup de Grâce or Pyrrhic Victory?

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

Under a common-law doctrine successful litigants love to hate – the “American Rule” – a party to litigation cannot recover its legal fees unless a contract, statute, or court rule expressly authorizes fee-shifting to the...more

A&O Shearman

Addressing The Enforceability Of Con Ed Provisions In Merger Agreements, Delaware Court Of Chancery Rejects Petition For...

A&O Shearman on

On October 31, 2023, Chancellor Kathaleen St. J. McCormick of the Delaware Court of Chancery issued final judgment denying a petition for a mootness fee award to a stockholder—who had previously asserted claims for breach of...more

Troutman Pepper

PA Appellate Court Issues Strong Reminder: CASPA’s Fee-Shifting Mechanism Applies to Subcontractors, Contractors, and Owners Who...

Troutman Pepper on

SDSP, LLC v. Attias, 2023 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1518 - The Superior Court of Pennsylvania vacated a multimillion-dollar award to subcontractors arising from a payment dispute, and remanded the matter to the trial court...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

California Court Confirms Surety’s Right to Recover Attorney Fees and Costs Incurred by Its Principal

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In Cell-Crete Corp. v. Fed. Ins. Co., a California court awarded a surety attorneys’ fees and costs that its principal incurred defending the surety against a claim on a public-works payment bond. This is good news for...more

Gray Reed

Louisiana Royalty Owner Survives Challenge to Demand For Payment

Gray Reed on

The question in Kim R. Smith Logging Inc. v. Indigo Minerals LLC  was whether a disgruntled Louisiana royalty owner sent its demand for unpaid royalties to the right party.  It turns out that it did....more

Patton Sullivan Brodehl LLP

California Supreme Court: Penal Code Section 496(c) Can Apply To Business Disputes

In a long-awaited opinion — Siry Investment, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour — the California Supreme Court held that California Penal Code section 496 can apply to a business dispute. The opinion resolves a split of authority among...more

7 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide