Block Billing Per Se Will Not Tank a Fee Request. Under our category "Homeowner Associations," we have reviewed numerous decisions where homeowners or HOAs feel the sting of "victory or defeat," even if ABC’s famous "World of Sports" mantra was not directly in play. Well, we have another one to share with you—where […]
Reciprocity Principle Underlying Section 1717 Required Reversal of Fee Denial. Here is a decision emphasizing that Civil Code section 1717 reciprocity principles will prevail, even where a successful litigant shows that the contract (in this case, CC&Rs) was inapplicable. The fees clause had to be construed as mutual in nature. The lower court did
Fourth District, Div. 1 Concludes That Not All Attorney’s Fee Awards Are Equal For Purposes Of Automatic Stay On Appeal. In the next case, the Court of Appeal has gifted us with a 47 page opinion arising from the fact that homeowners in a condominium association installed two sandstone-colored windows, rather than two dark-brown
Third District Reverses Denial of Fee to Prevailing Party. Ghandour v. Tahoe Sands Time Share Owners Association, Case No. C056395 (3d Dist. July 1, 2010) (unpublished) involved a trial court’s grant of a permanent injunction to plaintiff as against a defendant time share owners association, with the injunction prohibiting association from blocking her
Quote Comes from 2002 Unpublished Opinion. We would like to thank Justice Richard Fybel of the Fourth District, Division 3 for a great quote from a prior unpublished opinion involving a homeowner association-property owner dispute. In Niguel Shores Community Association v. Buehler, 2002 WL 31121089 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 25, 2002), both
Lower Court Erred in Failing to Find Fee Entitlement, to Determine Prevailing Party Status, or to Make Any Apportionments in Summarily Denying Diverse Defense Fee Requests. Trial courts do have a duty to examine fee entitlement, to determine prevailing party status, and to make any apportionments when examining diverse fee requests by different defendants.
CC&R Count Justified Fees to County. We have told you before that HOA contests can be expensive. Yes, they can. Many times, very expensive for the losing HOA, which likely will have to pass losing fees through to homeowners via special assessments or other insolvency options. In County of Los Angeles v. La
Trial Court Properly Denied Fee to Either Side, Says Court of Appeal. Don’t assume that the prevailing party determination for an award of routine costs and attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717/fee-shifting statutes is the same. They do differ, as the next case demonstrates. In Duclos v. Marina Pacifica Homeowners Assn.,
$88,671 Fee Award Entered Against Both Property Owners and Occupants. Losing HOA disputes can be costly for homeowners, because Civil Code section 1354 has a mandatory fee-shifting directive in favor of a prevailing party successfully enforcing CC&Rs. It can also extend to non-owner occupants, as the litigants in the next case learned.
Almost $500,000 in Total Fees Assessed Against Losing Homeowners. For all you Olympic watchers out there, this next case will resonate the famous “agony of defeat” line from ABC’s Wide World of Sports. In Sharp v. Anderson, Case No. B212528 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 18, 2010) (unpublished), plaintiff neighboring real property owners
