Cases: Prevailing Party

Fee Clause Interpretation, Prevailing Party, Section 1717: Defendant Successfully Challenging Plaintiff’s Trial Court Fee Request, Where Plaintiff Declared Prevailing Party Under Contract, Was Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees As The Prevailing Party

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

Defendant’s Limited Appellate Court Win Before Did Not Mean He Prevailed—There Can Only Be One!             Defendant lost an arbitration to plaintiffs who were declared prevailing parties under a contract by the arbitrator.  Plaintiffs moved for recovery of contractual attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717, a request granted by the trial court but then […]

Costs, Prevailing Party, Section 998, Section 1717: Trial Court Order Denying All Attorney’s Fees And Costs To Defendants Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Costs, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

Defendants Will Be Entitled To Substantial Fees/Costs On Remand, Not To Mention An Attempt To Garner Even More Fees.             This next case is a very substantial reverse of fortune on appeal.  So, that takes us to posting on Abregov v. Lawrence, Case No. G056866 (Abregov II) (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 19, 2020) (unpublished).

Equity, Prevailing Party: $2.41 Million Trial Court Fee Award Affirmed But $125,473.60 Appellate Fee Award Reversed

Cases: Equity, Cases: Prevailing Party

Trial Court Fee Withstood Because Good Faith Settlement With One Defendant Did Not Offset Jury Award Against Another Defendant.             In Campos v. Kennedy, Case No. B293745 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 17, 2020) (unpublished), a sexual assault case with very bad facts, the appellate court considered a $2.41 million fees award to the prevailing

Costs, Employment, Prevailing Party: $3,881.39 In Routine Costs, Out Of A Requested $38,813.96, To A Prevailing Wage Claim Plaintiff Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Costs, Cases: Employment, Cases: Prevailing Party

Reason Was That Plaintiff Only Had Limited Success, So No Abuse Of Discretion In The Reduction By The Lower Court.             So, a plaintiff prevails on a wage/hour claim for unpaid wages under Labor Code section 218.5, but only gets a minimal award which was limited success when other claims are considered?  Does that plaintiff

Prevailing Party, Private Attorney General: Private Attorney General Fee Denial Affirmed Based On Litigant’s Failure To File Appellate Opening Brief And Small Fees Award Against Governmental Entity Reversed As A Matter Of Law

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Plaintiff Did Not Prevail Against Governmental Entity So That $7,500 Government Code Section 800 Award Went POOF! On Appeal.             Ya know, appellate proceedings can really change results at the trial court level at different junctures of a case.  1041 20th Street, LLC v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., Case No. B295812 (2d Dist., Div.

Arbitration, Prevailing Party, Section 1717: Trial Court Properly Found That Respondent Did Not Prevail For Fee Recovery Even Though She Did Obtain A Ruling Denying A Petition To Confirm The Arbitration Award And Did Obtain A Vacatur Ruling

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

The Lower Court’s Discretionary Determination That No One Prevailed Was Affirmed On Appeal.             In Goraya v. Stephens, Case No. F078335 (5th Dist. Jan. 3, 2020) (unpublished), property seller and property buyer submitted to arbitration and settled, with the listing agent joined as a party in the arbitration at his own request, eventually obtaining an

Deed Of Trust, POOF!, Prevailing Party, Section 1717: $427,951.93 Fee Award Based On Deed Of Trust Fee Provision Went POOF! Because Nonjudicial Foreclosure Purchaser Relied On Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale Having No Fees Clause

Cases: Deeds of Trust, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Purchaser’s Action Against Tax Authorities Did Not Really Focus On Deed Of Trust With Fees Clause.             CP III Rincon Towers, Inc. v. Assessment Appeals Bd. of the City and County of San Francisco (Rincon EF Realty LLC), Case No. A155714 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Dec. 17, 2019) (unpublished) shows that Civil Code section 1717”s

Prevailing Party, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Misinterpretation Of Civil Code § 8460 Cost Pro Per Plaintiff His Mechanics’ Lien Claim And An Award Of Attorney Fees To Prevailing Defendant

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Pro Per Plaintiff Timely Filed Action After Recording Mechanics’ Lien, But Sought To Recover Compensation Owed For His Work Rather Than The Sale Of The Property Subject To The Lien And Application Of The Sale Proceeds To Pay The Amount Secured By The Lien.             In Settimi v. Hart, Case No. F079181 (5th Dist.,

Consumer Statutes, Prevailing Party: Abuse Of Discretion Where Trial Court Limited Attorney Fees Award Without Regard To Actual Time Expended By Plaintiffs’ Counsel In Successfully Initiating And Prosecuting Case Under The Song-Beverly Act

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Prevailing Party

Trial Court Erroneously Used Plaintiffs’ Separate Net Monetary Recovery As Basis For Determining Prevailing Party Rather Than Plaintiffs’ Success In Meeting Litigation Objectives.            Patel v. Mercedes-Benz USA, Case No. B293813 (2d Dist., Div. 4 December 17, 2019) (unpublished), includes a nice discussion on prevailing parties under the Song-Beverly Act.             Here,

Prevailing Party, Probate: Appellate Court’s Reversal Of A Probate Court Asset Characterization Required A Reexamination Of Whether Trustee’s Attorney’s Fees Were Proper Because She Was Really The Prevailing Party

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Probate

A Re-Do Was Ordered To Be Done By The Trial Judge In The First Instance.             In Placencia v. Strazicich, Case No. G055631 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 26, 2019) (published), our local Santa Ana appellate court reversed a trial judge’s characterization of bank account funds which had led the lower court to award attorney’s

Scroll to Top