$520,182.25 Is the Affirmed Fee Award.
In American Diversified Properties, Inc. v. RE/EX Valencia, Inc., Case No. B246501 (2d Dist., Div. 8 July 25, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiff lost a brokerage commission dispute to two co-defendants, with the lower court awarding the defendants (one of which was a cross-complainant) $520,182.25 in fees under a fees clause allowing recovery to a party substantially obtaining relief or defeating relief by another party (i.e., plaintiff).
The fee award was affirmed on appeal.
Losing plaintiff argued that the fee award violated due process because the fee request did not reference a proper fee entitlement basis, but the appellate court rejected this after determining that both CCP § 1021 and Civil Code § 1717 were mentioned in the fee petition. Because one of the defendants essentially brought a “defensive” cross-complaint, this qualified as a basis to determine that the defendant prevailed under the fee clause language. Also, even though one of the defendants did not obtain indemnity damages under a cross-complaint, this did not retard recovery of fees as costs under the brokerage agreement fees clause. Last, but not least, the fact that one of the co-defendants did not have to pay fees on an out-of-pocket basis did not mean that they were not “incurred” for purposes of a fee recovery award.