Second District, Division 3 Reverses Fee Award.
Summary judgments are one of the more frequently reversed adjudications, maybe second to sustaining of demurrers without leave to amend. The law in California is that reversal of a summary judgment means that the postjudgment fee and costs orders based upon the summary judgment also must be reversed. (Casey v. Overhead Door Corp., 74 Cal.App.4th 112, 124 (1999), disapproved on other grounds in Jimenez v. Superior Court, 29 Cal.4th 473, 481 n. 1 (2002).) That rule came into force in the next case, invoking our somewhat infamous POOF! principle.
In Paris v. USI of Southern California Ins. Services, Inc., Case No. B205045 (2d Dist., Div. 3 June 23, 2009) (unpublished), ex-employer defendant obtained summary judgment against ex-employee plaintiff in a breach of contract/wrongful discharge case. Subsequently, the trial court ordered plaintiff to pay defendant $157,725 in attorney’s fees and $6,665.35 in costs. The appellate panel reversed the summary judgment grant in an earlier appeal, finding there were triable issues of fact in the case.
By now, you know what happens to the fee/cost award. That’s right—it went POOF!, with the earlier reversal also meaning that the subsequent award had to be overturned.
Zan Zig performing with rabbit and roses, including hat trick and levitation. c1899. Library of Congress.