Lengthy Dispute Supported Adverse Award Of Over $1.45 Million Against Losing Parties And In Favor Of Two Groups Of Prevailing Parties.
In line with our Mission Statement that "[a]ll too often attorney fees become the tail that wags the dog in litigation,” the next case—a contentious easement interference dispute between parties farming on three adjoining parcels of land in Ventura County—resulted in the losing parties getting socked with contractual fees under CC&Rs for over $1.45 million, prompting both a merits and fee award appeals in Southfork Ranch, LLC v. Bunn, Case No. B279391 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Nov. 17, 2020) (unpublished). The 2/6 DCA, in a 3-0 opinion authored by Justice Perren, affirmed. Although the easement interference claims sounded in tort, they actually involved interpretation of CC&Rs such that they were “on the contract” for purposes of a fee recovery under Civil Code section 1717 (with a nice discussion of the jurisprudence in this area). The reasonableness of the fees was weakly challenged below, meaning the appellate contentions did not prevail upon review. Ouch!