• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Services
  • Contact
  • Reviews

California Defamation Law Blog

  • Home
  • About
  • Blogs
  • Archive Page
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Services
  • Contact Us
  • (626) 793-8607
You are here: Home / Anti-SLAPP / Mandatory Attorneys’ Fees To Prevailing anti-SLAPP Defendants

Mandatory Attorneys’ Fees To Prevailing anti-SLAPP Defendants

June 19, 2010 by Adrianos Facchetti Leave a Comment

California’s anti-SLAPP statute (CCP § 425.16(c)) provides that a "prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover his or her attorney’s fees and costs. The fee award is not discretionary–it is mandatory–and the fees can be very significant.

The purpose behind this rule is to discourage strategic lawsuits against public participation by imposing the litigation costs on the plaintiff.

In determining the amount of fees awardable to the prevailing defendant, the court will apply something called the "lodestar" approach. The lodestar is the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate prevailing in the community for similar work. The court may take into consideration other facts in setting the lodestar, e.g., the complexity of the case, the skill of counsel in defending the case, the success achieved, and other such factors.

At the end of the day, it is important to understand that this area of law is highly specialized and that it requires experience. You will need an attorney who has experience arguing these types of motions in order to persuade the court of the reasonableness or the unreasonableness (depending on which side you’re on) of the fees requested.

If you liked this post, please subscribe to the California Defamation Law Newsletter to receive the Ultimate Beginner’s Guide to Defamation Law. I hope you enjoy it.

The Author: Adrianos Facchetti is a Defamation Lawyer located in Los Angeles, California. He practices in the areas of defamation, slander, and libel law. He also has successfully brought and opposed anti-SLAPP motions on behalf of his clients.

Buffer Share

Filed Under: Anti-SLAPP, attorney, attorney's, fees Tagged With: attorney, attorney's fees, Fees

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

Some Featured

How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion

Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Recent Posts

Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law?

Does California’s anti-SLAPP statute apply in bankruptcy court?

Must attorney-client confidences be revealed in order to obtain attorney’s fees after a successful anti-SLAPP motion?

Follow Us On

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Search

Footer

California Defamation Law Blog

Law Offices of Adrianos Facchetti 4444 W. Riverside Drive, Suite 308, Burbank, CA 91505
California Defamation Lawyer & Attorney of Adrianos Facchetti Law Firm, offering services related to libel, internet defamation, slander, defamation of character, disparagement, anti-SLAPP, personal injury, car accidents, motorcycle accidents, trucking accidents, serving Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley, Pasadena, Burbank, Glendale, Arcadia, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Long Beach, Orange County, Ventura County, San Bernardino, and throughout California.

Recent Posts

  • How to determine which costs are allowable in connection with an anti-SLAPP motion July 18, 2022
  • Should a court consider a plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in determining how much to award in fees for the defendant following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 28, 2022
  • May a trial court consider a defendant’s “walk away” offer when determining the reasonableness of fees following a successful anti-SLAPP motion? June 24, 2022
  • Does a claim for intentional physical distress exist under California law? June 20, 2022

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in