FEE AWARD JUSTIFIED WHERE BENEFIT OUTWEIGHS SUIT COST, SAYS CALIF. APP. CT. Randoll v. SupraLife Int'l | Secondary Sources | Westlaw

FEE AWARD JUSTIFIED WHERE BENEFIT OUTWEIGHS SUIT COST, SAYS CALIF. APP. CT. Randoll v. SupraLife Int'l | Secondary Sources | Westlaw

View on Westlaw or start a FREE TRIAL today, FEE AWARD JUSTIFIED WHERE BENEFIT OUTWEIGHS SUIT COST, SAYS CALIF. APP. CT. Randoll v. SupraLife Int'l, Secondary Sources
Skip Page Header

FEE AWARD JUSTIFIED WHERE BENEFIT OUTWEIGHS SUIT COST, SAYS CALIF. APP. CT. Randoll v. SupraLife Int'l

17 No. 10 ANCODLLR 5Andrews Corporate Officers and Directors Liability Litigation Reporter (Approx. 3 pages)

FEE AWARD JUSTIFIED WHERE BENEFIT OUTWEIGHS SUIT COST, SAYS CALIF. APP. CT. Randoll v. SupraLife Int'l

17 No. 10 ANCODLLR 5Andrews Corporate Officers and Directors Liability Litigation Reporter (Approx. 3 pages)

17 No. 10 Andrews Corp. Off. & Directors Liab. Litig. Rep. 5
Andrews Corporate Officers and Directors Liability Litigation Reporter
January 14, 2002
Attorneys' Fees/Substantial Benefit Doctrine:
Copyright (c) 2002 Andrews Publications

FEE AWARD JUSTIFIED WHERE BENEFIT OUTWEIGHS SUIT COST, SAYS CALIF. APP. CT.

Randoll v. SupraLife Int'l

A California nutrition supplement company must pay $550,000 in fees to plaintiff attorneys who brought shareholder derivative charges against its officers and directors because the company will reap benefits that outweigh the amount it spent in...
End of Document© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.