Legal Opinion

Lealao v. Beneficial California, Inc.

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 10, 2000No. A085992PublishedCited by 71 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KLINE, P. J.

Appellants Richard U. Lealao and his wife Sese Lealao, who commenced this successful consumer class action, claim that the attorney fees awarded class counsel were unreasonably low. The questions before us are whether, under the circumstances of this case, the trial court had discretion to award a fee based solely on a percentage of the class benefit or, in the alternative, to measure an award calculated under the lodestar methodology by a percentage-of-the-benefit yardstick and to adjust the lodestar upward or downward on that basis. Our answers are no to the first…

2Cases cited69 opinions

  1. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean AirSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. City of Burlington v. DagueSupreme Court of the United States · 1992

64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by71 opinions

  1. Graham v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.California Supreme Court · 2005
  2. America Online, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
  3. Graciano v. Robinson Ford Sales, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
  4. Laffitte v. Robert Half International Inc.California Supreme Court · 2016
  5. Jadwin v. County of KernDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2011

66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API