Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Plaintiffs Winning Lease Dispute Under Broad Fees Clause Entitled To $158,180.75 Fee Recovery

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Defendant Recovered Less on Cross-Complaint Contractual Claim, So Plaintiffs Prevailed.      Julius Castle Restaurant, Inc. v. Payne, Case Nos. A130955 (1st Dist., Div. 1 June 10, 2013) (partially published; fee discussion not published) may be one of the first published cases discussing post-Riverisland factors for the courts and juries to consider after the overruling […]

Fee Clause Interpretation: Clause With “Prevailing Party” Language Not Limited To Contract Claims Allowed Fees To Plaintiff Prevailing On Negligence Claim But Suffering Defeat On Contract Claim

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  CCP § 1021 Trumped Civil Code § 1717 Rules, With Plaintiff Prevailing “Overall.”       Under Civil Code section 1717, a prevailing party can receive attorney’s fees based on prevailing under a contract claim, even though losing tort claims, if the fees clause is limited to contractual claims. However, if the fee clause is broader,

Fee Clause Interpretation/Homeowner Associations: HOA Not Entitled To Fee Recovery For Fiduciary Duty Victory Because Administration Of CC&Rs Fees Clause Doesn’t Cover Fiduciary Breach Claims

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Homeowner Associations

       In Hoofman v. Pacific Crest Community Assn., Case No. B230036 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 16, 2013) (unpublished), an HOA won some breach of fiduciary claims against homeowners. However, they were denied fee recovery. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the win on the breach of fiduciary claims did not fall within the

Fee Clause Interpretation: Specific Performance Claim Gave Rise To Fee Entitlement Under Broadly-Worded Contractual Fees Clause

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  $252,926.33 Fee Award Affirmed.      In Milano v. Edelson, Case No. B237971 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Apr. 11, 2013) (unpublished), buyer of a restaurant sued a seller for specific performance, deliberately electing that remedy over damages in order to get out to trial earlier. The stock purchase agreement, while lacking a “time is of

Arbitraton/Fee Clause Interpretation: Fee Recovery Under Broadly Worded Clause Justified Even Though Contractor Did Not Pursue Arbitration

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  Failure to File a Motion to Compel Arbitration Was Fatal.      Losers in Duke Kelso Constr. v. Silva, Case No. H036879 (6th Dist. Mar. 26, 2013) (unpublished) must have felt good about their chances on appeal under a broadly worded fees clause, where the winner litigated rather than pursued contractually-mandated arbitration. The problem was

Fee Clause Interpretation: “Incorporation By Reference” Of An Exhibit With A Fees Clause Into Contract Gave Rise To Fee Entitlement

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

       Demari v. Desert Oasis Mobile Estates, Case No. F064419 (5th Dist. Mar. 19, 2013) (unpublished) was a situation where plaintiff sued defendants for breach of contract and was defensed through a demurrer which was sustained without leave to amend. Then, the lower court granted attorney’s fees in favor of defendants as prevailing parties.

Appealability/Fee Clause Interpretation/Lodestar/Reasonableness Of Fees/SLAPP: Appellate Trifecta On Fee Issues

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: SLAPP

  Marathon Funding, LLC v. Paramount Pictures, Case No. B240723 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Mar. 4, 2013) (Unpublished).      In this first one, defendant won more than $690,548.90 in posttrial attorney’s fees under an investment agreement providing fees to the winner “in any action, suit, or other proceeding [that] is instituted concerning or arising out

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: “Action” Language In Written Easement Agreement Fees Clause Encompassed Both The Complaint Or An Answer Raising A Successful Defense

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Appellate Court Reverses Fees Denial Order, Siding With Justice Armstrong’s Interpretation of “Action” in Gil.      We now have a split of intermediate appellate thinking on whether “action” encompasses just the complaint or also a “defense” in an answer. Exxess Electronizz v. Heger Realty Corp., 64 Cal.App.4th 698 (1998) and Gil v. Mansano, 121

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Third-Party Beneficiaries Win Fee Recovery Under Broadly Worded Prevailing Party Clause

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Clause Language and Negotiation of Settlement Demonstrated Prevailing Parties Were Third Party Beneficiaries      In Homeport Ins. Services, Inc. v. Lundy, Case No. B238296 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Jan. 28, 2013) (unpublished), an injured longshoreman settled a worker’s compensation claim against SSA (terminal associated entities) and a personal injury action against City of Long

Fee Clause Interpretation: Broadly Worded Fee Clause Under Joint Venture Agreement Allowed Fee Recovery By Administrator Of Partner’s Estate

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

       In Mako Fund, Inc. v. Perrone, Case No. B238048 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 30, 2012) (unpublished), two litigants sued each other and one obtained a judgment for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs of suit, and attorney’s fees. After winner found out that loser lacked assets to satisfy the judgment, it moved to

Scroll to Top