Mediation Noncompliance And Fee Cap Arguments Are Rejected On Appeal.
In Karrass v. Carey, Case No. B344608 (2d Dist., Div. 8 July 30, 2026) (unpublished), tenant defensed a landlord in an unlawful detainer action based on an alleged notice to cure violations or quit, a notice found deficient. Later, the trial court awarded tenant prevailing party fees of $69,560 under a contractual fees clause in the lease agreement.
The appellate court affirmed the fee award. Landlord argued that tenant did not comply with a mediation condition precedent in the lease, but that was dispatched because unlawful detainer actions were excepted from that condition. [This is generally standard in most leases and California real estate purchase agreements.] With respect to the argument that there was a fee cap in the lease, the Court of Appeal reasoned that the $1,000 fee cap in the printed lease form was superseded by a modification which stated that landlord could obtain unlimited prevailing party fees against tenant—under Civil Code section 1717, that was reciprocal in nature such that tenant could obtain “uncapped” fees as awarded by the trial court.