Notice of Appeal of Merits Motion Denial Did Not Give Appellate Court Jurisdiction to Rule on Later Fee Ruling.
One nice thing about our blog is that the appellate courts have to decide disputes all the time and, in doing so, reinforce lessons that we have discussed as arising from prior posted cases. One more time, folks . . . . protectively appeal separate adverse fee orders, even if you think the fee orders are encompassed with some prior merits determinations. The litigants in the next case did not appeal the fee order, much to their chagrin.
What happened in Auto Auction Group, Inc. v. Ritz Leasing, Inc., Case No. B216247 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 26, 2011) (unpublished) is that certain parties had a motion to amend a judgment denied, which denial was appealed straightaway. The winning litigants in the amendment motion moved for fees, which was litigated after the date of the appeal notice relating to the amendment motion. The lower court granted the winning litigants fees of $81,028.99. The losing litigants on the motion to amend judgment appealed both the merits and the adverse fee orders.
With respect to the fee order, the appellate court determined it did not have jurisdiction to consider the propriety of the order. Reason? The fee order was the product of a motion that was litigated well after the filing of the notice of appeal relating to the judgment amendment motion. As such, the appellate court was without jurisdiction to act on the fee issue. (Colony Hill v. Ghamaty, 143 Cal.App.4th 1156, 1171-1172 (2006).)
By now, we hope the moral of the story is clear on appealing adverse fee orders. We can’t give legal advice, but believe this case illustrates what happens when protective action is not taken.