Trope, Conflict, and Partial Success Challenges Unsuccessful On Appeal.
In Creger v. Hudson 141 Homeowners Assn., Case No. B247480 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 5, 2015) (unpublished), condo owner sued the HOA, property manager, HOA attorneys, and his own attorneys for certain actions relating to a prior condo defect suit, getting SLAPPed based principally upon the Civil Code section 47 litigation privilege. Also, although the amounts are not revealed, many of the defendants garnered mandatory fees as SLAPP victors—we can only surmise they were substantial, given that condo owner did argue they were unreasonable in nature, a claim rebuffed on appeal given the failure to particularize the objections to the requested fees.
The fee grants were affirmed, and the successful defendants also were able to go for further fees and costs for winning the appeal.
Numerous challenges by condo owner to the awarded fees were rejected. The Trope objection was unpersuasive, because the attorney from the same firm as represented individual attorneys in the firm had a separate attorney-client relationship with the individual attorneys whose individual interests he was representing, so fees were proper. (Ellis Law Group, LLP v. Nevada City Sugar Loaf Properties, LLC, 230 Cal.App.4th 244, 254 (2014).) Condo owner argued that his former attorneys were laboring under a conflict of interest, but the appellate court found that the ethical violation was not serious given a prior conflict waiver and no evidence confidential information was disclosed. Condo owner then argued that HOA defendant did not prevail by only obtaining dismissal of 18 of the 32 claims, but “partial success” qualifies as long as the results were significant and of practical benefit to the defendant. (City of Industry v. City of Fillmore, 198 Cal.App.4th 191, 218 (2011).)