Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Attorney Garnering Large Fee Award Lost It On Appeal Because Losing LLC Members Could Not Collect Fees From Him

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  $178,000 Fee Award Went POOF!      De novo review of a fees clause can be trouble for any litigant, appellant or respondent, on appeal. This means the appellate courts put their contractual interpretation “hats” on to see if the construction passes muster. Sometimes it does; sometimes it doesn’t.      Doesn’t was the verdict in […]

Fee Clause Interpretation: Fees Clause Allowing Prevailing Party Recovery To “Any Party” Permitted Fees Award To Third Party Beneficiary Unsecured Creditor

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  Case Fell Between the Cracks of Unnamed Parties and Third Party Beneficiary Cases, Fifth District Rules.      The Fifth District, in Cargill, Inc. v. Souza, Case No. F061767 (5th Dist. Dec. 9, 2011) (certified for publication), reversed a decision denying requested attorney’s fees to an unsecured creditor claiming it was a third party beneficiary

Fee Clause Interpretation: Broad Fees Clause In Shareholder Agreement Justified Award Of Fees To Defense After Suit Dismissed For Failure To Amend Or Post A Bond

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

CCP § 1021 Was the Basis.      A $37,369 fee award against plaintiffs and in favor of defendants was affirmed in Higuera v. La Carreta Supermarkets, Inc., Case No. G044286 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 2, 2011) (unpublished), in a 3-0 decision authored by Justice Bedsworth. Here is what happened.      Plaintiffs instigated a hybrid

Fees Clause Interpretation/Arbitration: “Such Proceeding” Language Broad Enough To Encompass Fee Recovery For Litigation, Where Parties Waived Arbitration Rights

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  Breadth of Language Made the Difference in this One.      Here is an interesting one that confirms that the breadth of language in a fees clause can make a difference. It especially did here, where the parties waived arbitration rights but the fees clause, but the use of “proceeding” language was broad enough to

Fees Clause Interpretation: Broad LLC Operating Agreement Fees Clause Covered Both Contract And Tort Claims

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  Substantial Fee Recovery Allowed      We know of nothing proprietary, so here is a fees clause contained in a LLC Operating Agreement that reaped one party a truck load of fees: “If any party to this Agreement institutes any action, suit, counterclaim, appeal, arbitration or mediation for any relief against another party, declaratory or

Fee Clause Interpretation: Pursuing Reserved Appellate Rights Did Not Give Rise To Fee Recovery Under Settlement Agreement Fees Clause

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  $35,000 Fee Award Vacated By Second District, Division 5.      Where the contents of a contractual fees clause is clear in nature (with no factual disputes), this sets up an issue of law that an appellate court can review de novo. (Winet v. Price, 4 Cal.App.4th 1159, 1165-1166 (1992).) That is exactly what happened

Fees Clause Interpretation: Does Clause Mandating Award Of “Actual Costs And Expenses” To Prevailing Party Mean Actual Or Reasonable Fees?

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

Second District, Division 2 Answers the Question Under Civil Code Section 1717.      We have seen numerous contracts that have attorney’s fees clauses that read something like this: “In any action between the parties arising out of or in relation to this Agreement, including any collection attempts should Payment not be timely made, the prevailing

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Successful Defense Of Contractual Claim Garners Fee Recovery, But Successful Defense Of Tort Claims Does Not

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Breadth of Clauses Are the Determinative Factors.      By way of summary adjudication, nonsuit, and directed verdict, defendants beat contract and tort claims brought by plaintiffs, with the two defendants (Mr. Sun and C2) seeking postjudgment attorney’s fees awards but only C2 garnering a $120,000 fee award for prevailing on an implied covenant contract

INTERPRETATION OF FEES CLAUSE: Court Of Appeal Reverses $22,500 Fees Recovery Because Contractual Fees Clause Did Not Encompass Broker-Salesman Litigation Work

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  Second District, Division 3 Finds Contractual Interpretation of Fees Clause Was Wrong By Lower Court.      Where there is no conflict in evidence (usually meaning divergent parol evidence), appellate courts will independently construe contractual provisions as a matter of law. In doing so, they may disagree with a lower court’s construction in the process.

Scroll to Top