Legal Opinion
Abraham Abittan, et al. v. Hansen Law Firm, P.C., et al.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided May 4, 2026No. 5:25-cv-05427Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ABRAHAM ABITTAN, et al., Case No. 25-cv-05427-SVK 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER RE AWARD OF 9 v. ATTORNEY’S FEES 10 HANSEN LAW FIRM, P.C., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 72 11 Defendants. 12 This malicious prosecution action involved a complex web of parties: eight plaintiffs 13 (“Plaintiffs”) and three groups of defendants, three law firms and individual attorneys belonging to 14 those firms (Hansen Law Firm P.C. and its attorneys (the “HLF Defendants”); SAC Attorneys, 15 LLP and its attorneys (the “SAC Defendants”); and Ye & Associates…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Ketchum v. MosesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- Julie Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles, a Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Baral v. SchnittCalifornia Supreme Court · 2016
- Loretta J. Brokeshoulder SCHWARZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Serrano v. UnruhCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.