Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Fee Clause Interpretation, Interpleader, Section 1717: Bank Winning Fee Award For Prosecuting Interpleader Cross-Complaint And Successfully Defending Against Plaintiff’s Complaint Reversed And Remanded

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Interpleader, Cases: Section 1717

Appellate Court Offered Guidance, Including That No Section 1717 Adverse Fee Award On Plaintiff’s Complaint Could Be Granted On Grounds Advanced By Lender.             Plaintiff octogenarian sued her lender on various theories stemming from lender’s failure to disburse timely insurance proceeds covering a fire loss.  In response to plaintiff’s Complaint, Lender filed an interpleader cross-complaint.  […]

Allocation/Fee Clause Interpretation:  $66,103 Fee Award Against Losing Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Affirmed Based On Broad Fees Clause And Common Intersection of Complaint And Cross-Complaint Claims

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Underlying Dispute Related To A Grading Of Dr. J’s 1972 Trading Card.             This next case illustrates an interesting application of attorney’s fees principles we have seen in many cases to a dispute over grading of a Dr. J trading card.  Let’s get to it.             In Knafo v. Collectors Universe, Inc., Case No. G055112

Assignment, Deed Of Trust, Fee Clause Interpretation:  Defendant Lender Entitled To Fee Award Under Deed Of Trust Fees Clause For Winning Conversion Claim Against Plaintiff’s Assignee

Cases: Assignment, Cases: Deeds of Trust, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Fees Clause Was Broad Enough To Encompass Conversion Claim And Assignees Were “On The Hook.”             In Sanchez v. El Monte Investments, LLC, Case No. B276423 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Mar. 27, 2018) (unpublished), former property owner sued her lender for conversion of certain insurance proceeds retained by the lender after fire damage to the

Costs, Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717:  Successful Attorneys On Contract Claim Properly Granted Fees; Successful Plaintiff On Tort Claims Properly Denied Fees; And Plaintiff Improperly Denied Costs As Prevailing Party With Net Judgment In Malpra

Cases: Costs, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

Many Cross-Over Fees And Costs Issues Considered By Appellate Court In This One.             In Davidson v. Southwick, Case No. E066978 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 26, 2018) (unpublished), plaintiff client successfully won a malpractice action based on various torts but lost a contract claim against certain attorney parties, winning a compensatory jury verdict of

Fee Clause Interpretation/Prevailing Party:  Fifth District Reverses Costs Denial, Remands For Redo On Fee Clause Interpretation, And Reverses 128.7 Sanctions Award

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party

Appellate Court Did De Novo Review On Most Issues.             In a fairly lengthy decision, the Fifth District basically reversed trial court determinations on fees and costs issues in Johnson v. Johnson, Case No. F073191 (5th Dist. Feb. 26, 2018) (unpublished), involving a dispute between siblings arising out of their real estate partnership where the

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717:  Fifth District, In Split Decision, Decides That Permissive Fee Clause Is Enforceable By Its Terms, With Section 1717 Not Applying

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

Dissent Argues That Section 1717 Does Have Precedence In This Situation, So That Fees To Prevailing Party Should Be Determined Upon A Remand.             In City of Dinuba v. Universal Biopharma Research Institute, Inc., Case No. F072497 (5th Dist. Feb. 20, 2018) (unpublished), City of Dinuba filed an unlawful detainer action against two defendants, although

Fee Clause Interpretation:  Trial Judge’s Award Of Fees Based On Promissory Note Fees Clause Was Erroneous

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: POOF!

$53,637 Contractual Fees Award Went POOF! On Appeal.             In Clark v. Delay, Case No. D072856 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 19, 2018) (unpublished), plaintiff filed suit over a partnership dissolution dispute mainly involving the claim that plaintiff did not get insurance proceeds under a buy-sell type of alleged oral arrangement.  Among other documents, there

Fee Clause Interpretation:  Fee Clauses Only Allowing Recovery For Arbitration Related Work Did Not Give Entitlement To Fees For Trial Work Only

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Fee Clause Was Unambiguous In Nature.             After a lot of trial activity (including fraud claims adjudicated against a defendant in a bench trial), the successful plaintiff obtained an attorney’s fees award based on an LLC operating agreement provision allowing for fees limited to “reimbursement of attorney fees, costs and expenses incurred in connection with

Construction/Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717:  Fees Clause In Masonry Subcontractor-Material Supplier Contract Did Not Trigger Third Party Beneficiary Exposure Against Real Property Owners Who Did Not Prevail Against Material Supplier

Cases: Construction, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Specific Breadth Of Clause Was Dispositive.             Prince v. Thompson Building Materials, Case No. B280813 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 9, 2018) (unpublished) involved a situation where real property owners sued a material supplier to enforce contractual warranties under a third-party beneficiary against their masonry subcontractor.  Ultimately, owners lost and material supplier sought to recoup

Fee Clause Interpretation:  Narrow LP Agreement Fee Clause Did Not Allow For Tort Recovery Against Unsuccessful Investor Plaintiff

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

$657,000 Fee Award For Defense In Investment Dispute Went Away Based On Interpretation Of Fees Clause.              As we have posted many time under our category “Fee Clause Interpretation,” a fees clause in many an agreement may require an appellate court to reverse a significant fee recovery where the clause in narrow in scope.            

Scroll to Top