Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Deadlines And Fee Clause Interpretation: Second District, Division 6 Affirms $121,000 Fee/Cost Award In Neighborhood Mega-Squabble

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

  Fee Motion Found Timely and Declaratory Relief Action Was “On the Contract” for Purposes of Justifying the Award.      We knew that this next case was going to be a crazy one, when Acting Presiding Justice Yegan wrote, “Within a year or so, [the] relationship [between neighbors] had deteriorated from a warm friendship to […]

Fee Clause Interpretation: $278,323 Fee Award Remanded For Failure To Determine If Narrow Fee Clause Truly Covered Certain Pled Claims

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation

Tort Claims Were Not Covered, Others Were, and Some Needed to be Revisited.      The Sixth District, in a scholarly unpublished 3-0 opinion authored by Acting Presiding Justice Bamattre-Manoukian, has a very thoughtful discussion of the breadth of a fees clause in a promissory note when plaintiffs prevailed on professional negligence and vendor’s lien claims,

Fee Clause Interpretation: CAR Broker Fee Clause Draws Starkly Different Views On Fee Recovery In Unpublished Decision

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  First District, Division 2 Panel Has Very Divergent Perspectives on Breadth of Fee Clause.      Here is a very interesting unpublished decision about the interpretation of a CAR form fee clause in a brokerage contract. The main dispute centered upon the interpretation of the scope of this provision: “In any action, proceeding or arbitration

Fee Clause Interpretation And Settlement Exclusion: Court Of Appeal Reverses Trial Court Refusal To Grant Attorney’s Fees To Prevailing Supplier In Water Clarification Building Fire

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Settlement

  Third District Finds Settlement Agreement Carve-Out Preserved Right to Seek Fees Under Indemnity Agreement Clause.      Bravo to the attorneys representing a prevailing party in the next case. They properly worded a partial settlement agreement carve-out so as to preserve their client’s ability to seek fees under a contract once the client prevailed against

Section 1717: Trope Limitation Is Trumped By Broadly Worded Fees Clause In Unpublished Decision

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

Second District, Division 4 So Holds, Noting No Decisions On Point.      We have examined numerous cases that have denied an award of attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717 because of the limitation set forth in Trope v. Katz, 11 Cal.4th 274 (1995), holding that in pro per attorneys representing themselves cannot obtain fee

Section 1717 And Fees Clause Interpretation: Broad Fees Clause Meant Trial Court Erred In Denying Fee Recovery To Prevailing Mortuary

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

Second District, Division 6 Also Holds Fees Do Not Have To Be Apportioned.      Broad contractual language allowing for fee recovery “in any lawsuit or other legal proceeding to which this Agreement gives” can even grant entitlement to fee recovery with respect to tort claims. (Xuereb v. Marcus & Millichap, Inc., 3 Cal.App.4th 1338, 1342-1343

Section 1717 And Unlicensed Contractor: No One Is Happy About $2,000 Fee Recovery

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Unlicensed Contractors

Award Is Sustained, But Winning Subcontractor Under Contract With Fees Clause Fights Back Unlicensed General Contractor’s Illegality Argument.      Usually, under our category “Unlicensed Contractors,” we are dealing with decisions where an unlicensed contractor wins a dispute with a fees clause and attempts to obtain an award of attorney’s fees—not very successfully. In the next

Section 1717 And Fees Clause Interpretation: Fee Denials Against Apartment Seller And Escrow Company Reversed And Remanded For Reconsideration

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Second District, Division 7 Finds Reversal of Prejudgment Interest Issue Requires Reexamination of Prevailing Party Determination and the Escrow Instructions Fee Clauses Were Sufficiently Broad for Fee Entitlement Purposes      In Marina Glencoe, L.P. v. Malibu Escrow Corp., Case No. B203415 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 1, 2010) (unpublished), an apartment building purchaser recovered

Fee Clause Interpretation, 998 Offers, And Routine Costs: A Three-Fer In One Case—And A Resultant POOF! Upon Reversal Of The Fee Award

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: POOF!, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 998

Substantial Fee Award Reversed Because Fees Provision Did Not Reach Noncontract Recovery, While Rest of Trial Court’s Fee/Costs Orders Affirmed on Appeal.      In Gaggero v. First Federal Bank of California, Case No. B207273 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 30, 2009) (unpublished), Borrower voluntarily dismissed with prejudice his equitable, statutory and breach of contract claims,

Scroll to Top