$56,100 Fee Award Affirmed In Dispute Over $10,171.26 Receivable Based on Fees Clause in Parties’ Contract.
Food Safety Net Services v. Eco Safe Systems, USA, Inc., Case No. B231667 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 4, 2012) (published) goes to show you how even minor disputes can produce exponentially greater fee awards for the prevailing party, even if other battles are going to be waged by the parties.
In this one, plaintiff was suing to recoup $10,171.26 in payment under a completed services contract with a fees clause. Plaintiff defeated defendant’s cross-claims via summary judgment, a merits ruling affirmed in this appeal. After the cross-complaint was dismissed, the action was reclassified from unlimited ($25,000 in dispute or over) to limited (under $25,000 in dispute). The lower court then awarded plaintiff $56,100 in attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717 for prevailing on the unlimited cross-claim part of the case.
Defendant appealed the fee award on the basis that plaintiff’s limited civil complaint was still out for resolution, so the award was premature until plaintiff got an unqualified win on the remaining piece of the action.
Not so, said the appellate court. Under these procedural circumstances, the reclassification of the complaint to limited meant that the cross-complaint summary judgment was independently appealable and that plaintiff indeed did prevail on the unlimited piece of the case–akin to the discrete proceeding found to give rise to fee exposure in Otay (a case explored often in our category “Prevailing Party”). Fee award affirmed, along with the summary judgment ruling on the cross-complaint.