Technical Challenges Are Rejected At Appellate Level.
In Coastline RE Holdings Corp. v. Brillouet, Case No. B282382 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Aug. 24, 2017) (unpublished), owners/residential borrowers had their house foreclosed (after quitclaiming the property to various entities and filing bankruptcies which were dismissed) and then lost an eviction action by the buyer who obtained the property at the nonjudicial foreclosure sale. The buyer designated the unlawful detainer action as an unlimited civil action, but the superior court clerk mistakenly designated the case as a limited case—an error eventually corrected along the way. Buyer eventually gained possession of the property, was awarded damages for 10 months of lost rent, and was awarded $210,000 in contractual attorney’s fees based on a fees provision in the deed of trust. Losing owners/borrowers appealed, with no success.
Based on the argument that this was a limited case (which was rejected by the appellate court), appellants argued that the fee motion was untimely based on the 30-day deadline to file fee motions in limited cases. The 2/6 DCA disagreed, finding this was an unlimited case and, beyond that, no notice of entry of judgment was served such that the fees motion was timely served 90 days after entry of judgment even under limited case rules.
There was a contractual basis for the fee award, based on the deed of trust fees provision, which was violated when appellants remained in possession after foreclosure.
The amount of the fee award was sustained on appeal, given that (1) appellants did not make specific objections to fee items before the trial court, and (2) appellants did not disprove that the fees were not reasonably related to the unlawful detainer action vigorously contested by them below.