Cases: Prevailing Party

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Landlord Winning 72.36% Of Fee Recovery Based On Tenant Responsibility Was Entitled To Fee Recovery Of $21,372.25

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Prevailing Party Is A Discretionary Determination Where No One Is A Clear Winner.      2845 Monterey Road, LLC v. Posada, Case No. H039053 (6th Dist. June 23, 2014) (unpublished) is a discretionary “prevailing party” determination under a landlord-tenant dispute with a lease having a fees clause. Ultimately, landlord seemed to prevail, but not by […]

Estoppel/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Long-Standing Dispute Over L.A. Metro Red Line Subway Performance Looks Like It Is Winding To A Conclusion

Cases: Estoppel, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Fee Exposure Frenzy Did Play Out on Appeal.      Tutor-Saliba-Perini J.V. v. L.A. County Metro. Transp. Auth., Case No. B232372 (2d Dist., Div. 7 June 16, 2014) (unpublished) ultimately came down to a situation of what party might obtain attorney’s fees in a two decades battle over compensation owed for work on the Los

POOF!/Retainer Agreement/Prevailing Party and Section 1717: Appellate Court’s Reversal of Fee Disgorgement Order Meant Remand Necessary To See Who Prevailed

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717

  Client’s Fee/Costs Recovery of $688,634 Goes POOF! For Now.      In Fleischman v. Law Office of Paul Stanton, Case No. B216898 (2d Dist., Div. 8 June 12, 2014) (unpublished), which involved nasty conservatorship/elder abuse claims among trust beneficiaries with respect to a deceased trustee, client was able to invalidate a retainer agreement which placed

Allocation/Prevailing Party/Reasonableness Of Fees/Special Fee Shifting Statute: Two Tenants Recovering Fees Of $184,330.40 In Tenant Ordinance Dispute Keep Them On Appeal Against Landlord Defendants

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Fee Award Did Not Have To Be Proportional To $45,441 Jury Verdict Recovery.      In Ochoa v. San Juan, Case Nos. A130993/A131051 (1st Dist., Div. 2 June 9, 2014) (unpublished), the appellate court considered the review of a $184,330.40 to two tenants under a tenant ordinance/ local proposition with prevailing party provisions even though

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: After 15 Years Of Controversy, Appellate Court Affirms Decision That Defendant/Cross-Complainant Did Not Prevail For Purposes of 1717 Fee Recovery

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Both Sides Partially Succeeded, So Lower Court’s Ruling Was No Abuse of Discretion.      The next case illustrates how appellate courts will defer to the lower court’s determination that there was no prevailing party for Civil Code section 1717 fee recovery unless there was a truly unqualified winner, with the result climaxing an apparent

Appealability/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Because Lower Court Erred In Sustaining Demurrer, Party Garnering Fee Award Was Not Prevailing Party

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  $22,230 Fee Award Went POOF!      In Vestar/Kimco Tustin, L.P. V. Sesar, Case No. G048831 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 30, 2014) (unpublished), the lower court sustained a demurrer to a breach of lease action and overruled a demurrer to a breach of guaranty cause of action, with plaintiff filing a voluntary dismissal of

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Respondent Winning “Broom Clean” Property Vacation Dispute Garners Fee Award As Prevailing Party

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Respondent Satisfied Pragmatic Test for Prevailing under 1717.      In Adelman v. Adelman, Case No. B248303 (2d Dist., Div. 4 May 13, 2014) (unpublished), respondent was awarded fees after successfully litigating the issue of whether appellant vacated a property and left it in “broom clean” condition. Respondent proved that she had to incur clean-up

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Guarantor Of Arbitration Award Was Properly Hit With $85,500 In Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Arbitration Award Winner Did Prevail In Subsequent Action, Despite Uncertainty As to Whether Fees Were Damages or Post-trial Costs.      Whyaduck Productions, Inc. v. Block, Case No. B245051 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Apr. 9, 2014) (unpublished) is a case which somewhat flummoxed the appellate court given a sparse record and the position of the

Prevailing Party: Trope Prohibition Prevents Successful Sole Proprietorship From Collecting $120,912 In Fees From Former Clients

Cases: Prevailing Party

  Associates Were Working For Sole Proprietorship, Not Purely Personal Interests of Attorney; Carpenter Case Found On Point.      Soni v. Wellmike Enterprise Co. Ltd., Case No. B242288 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 26, 2014) (published) is another addition to the jurisprudence on the Trope v. Katz, 11 Cal.4th 274 (1995) prohibition—if you as an

Prevailing Party/Section 998/Section 1717: Plaintiffs In Sewer Easement Dispute With Nearby Defendants Not Entitled To Fees, While Defendants Properly Awarded $478,022 In Fees Under CCP § 998

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

  Result Was “Mixed” For Plaintiffs, While Plaintiffs Did Not Eclipse Defense 998 Offer.      The result in Smith v. Esmailzadeh, Case No. B239828 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Mar. 19, 2014) (unpublished) illustrates well our Mission Statement that "[a]ll too often attorney fees become the tail that wags the dog in litigation."  Deane Gardenhome Assn.

Scroll to Top