legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Lindstrom v. Ahmed CA6
Cross-complainants Carl A. Lindstrom and James A. Otto were cross-defendant Nasteho Ahmed’s attorneys in her employment discrimination lawsuit against a hospital. After settling with the hospital, Ahmed refused to honor the contingent attorney’s fee agreement she had entered into with Lindstrom. The hospital filed an interpleader action to resolve the dispute. Lindstrom and Otto cross-complained against Ahmed for breach of the contingency agreement, and prevailed following a bench trial. Lindstrom was awarded contractual attorney’s fees (Civ. Code, § 1717) to pay Otto for representing him in the breach of contract case. Ahmed appeals the trial court’s order granting attorney’s fees, arguing based on Trope v. Katz (1995) 11 Cal.4th 274 (Trope) that Lindstrom’s and Otto’s status as Ahmed’s prior co-counsel precludes them from recovering Civil Code section 1717 attorney’s fees. For the reasons stated here, we will affirm the trial court’s order after judgment.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale