That Determination Depends On A Future Fee Motion On Whether Entitlement Is Established—Not So, Ultimately In This Case.
In WCST Enterprises, LLC v. Ling, Case No. G065236 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 28, 2026) (published), the dispute involved neighbors quarreling over the rights to a parking space in a condominium complex—but essentially was a quiet title dispute which did not involve CC&Rs or other governing HOA documents. In the end, one side did win, with the lower court stating in a judgment that there was a prevailing party before an actual attorney’s fees motion was filed and adjudicated. In the end, after considering attorney’s fees motion arguments, the lower court found no fee entitlement such that fees were denied as to the putative “prevailing party,” which sought $292,544 in fees under the Davis-Striling Act and the CC&Rs (Civil Code § 1717).
The fee denial was affirmed on appeal. The case was published to demonstrate that a generic statement in a judgment, before a fee motion is adjudicated to finality, as far as a prevailing party determination, does not mean it is so until the fee motion is decided. The appellate court agreed with the lower court, in denying fees, that the essence of the case was a grant deed quiet title dispute, not something giving rise to fees under other statutory bases.