Barnes v. Rosenthal Toyota, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• discussing the abuse of discretion standard in the context of a Consumer Protection Act Claim
• finding that a fee award was “reasonable and proper” where the record “suggests that the court did in fact apportion its award of counsel fees only to those costs and expenses that appellant incurred in litigating the successful [M]CPA action”
• finding that a fee award was “proper and reasonable” where the record “suggests that the court did in fact apportion its award of counsel fees only to those costs and expenses that appellant incurred in litigating the successful [M]CPA action”
• \[I]n cases involving multiple causes of action ... a court must make specific findings of fact as to which part of the litigant's attorney's fees and expenses are attributable to the maintenance of the meritless claims.\
• “[A] court may not impose sanctions under Rule 1-341 without rendering specific findings of fact on the record as to a party’s bad faith or lack of substantial justification in pursuing a cause of action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).