How is a court's determination of reasonable attorney fees reviewed?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from Seltzer v. R.W. Selby & Co., B270168 (Cal. App. 2017):

A trial court's determination of reasonable attorney fees is reviewed for abuse of discretion. (Laffitte v. Robert Half Internat., Inc. (2016) 1 Cal.5th 480, 488.) '"The scope of discretion always resides in the particular law being applied, i.e., in the "legal principles governing the subject of [the] action . . . ." Action that transgresses the confines of the applicable principles of law is outside the scope of discretion and we call such action an "abuse" of discretion.'" (Lealao, supra, 82 Cal.App.4th at p. 25.)

Other Questions


On appeal, can the court conduct an independent review of the transcript of the in camera hearing and the records reviewed by the trial court to determine whether any records were improperly withheld? (California, United States of America)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
Does Defendant have any evidence to support her claim that the court failed to review the supporting documents to determine whether attorney fees requested were reasonable in need and amount? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, does the appellate court have power to substitute its factual determination for that factual determination? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of review applied by a reviewing court to determine that a sentence is cruel and unusual? (California, United States of America)
Is a client's attorney required to repay all moneys laid out by the attorney to the attorney before the client can make a claim against the attorney? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General's assertion that appellate courts review probation conditions for abuse of abuse of power, if the issue was raised in the trial court? (California, United States of America)
In reviewing a criminal conviction challenged as lacking evidentiary support, does the juvenile court have to consider the same questions in determining guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
On review of the denial of a motion to suppress, how is the court determined that search and seizure was reasonable? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.