Cases: Prevailing Party

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Defense Successfully Asserting Lack Of Standing Entitled To Fee Recovery Against Non-Prevailing Plaintiff Based On Civil Code Section 1717

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Real Property Service Case Found Dispositive.      After the business deteriorated, a plaintiff under an agreement with a fees clause sued defendant for selling a florist business, raising contract, UCL, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation claims. In Phase I of a court trial, the trier of fact found that the plaintiff lacked standing to sue […]

Prevailing Party/Sanctions/Section 1717: $60,000 Sanctions Award Against Plaintiffs/Plaintiffs’ Counsel Under CCP § 128.7 Affirmed

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Section 1717

Additional $60,000 Fee Recovery Against Plaintiffs For Dismissed Tort Claims Also Sustained Based On Breadth Of Fees Clause. ​ Peake v. Underwood, Case No D061267 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 25, 2014) (partially published) is a great primer on CCP § 128.7 sanctions, on how to properly present such a sanctions request, and on the

Appealability/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Defense Properly Denied Attorney’s Fees Because She Was Not The Clear Winner

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

Easement Dispute Produced Mixed Result, Likely More Pro-Plaintiffs In Nature. ​This one involved a water well easement dispute by adjoining owners, prompting a suit by plaintiffs when defendant locked the pump house and put up a “no trespassing” sign. The lower court ultimately upheld plaintiffs’ right to use of some water from the well, but

Appealability/Prevailing Party: Defense Appealing Only Judgment, But Not Separate Fee Award, Could Challenge Fee Award

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Prevailing Party

  However, Defense Challenges Did Not Prevail On Appeal.      In Polaris Medical Academy, LLC v. Allen, Case No. G045800 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 24, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiffs won a judgment totaling $450,000 against various defendants, with the judgment stating “Plaintiffs shall recover costs in the amount of $___________ and attorneys’ fees in the

Arbitration/Prevailing Party: Trial And Appellate Fees Incurred In Successfully Opposing Petition For Arbitration Were Premature

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Prevailing Party

  Merits Were Yet To Be Decided.      Cellphone Termination Fee Cases, Case Nos. A136818 and A138424 (1st Dist., Div. 5 June 24, 2014) (both unpublished) were situations where plaintiff successfully opposing a petition to compel arbitration by Sprint obtained very substantial trial and appellate fees for prevailing at this “interim” stage of the overall

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: $90,000 Fee Award To The Defense For Prevailing On Provisional Receiver/Injunction Requests Reversed Where Plaintiff Voluntarily Dismissed Without Prejudice

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Dismissal Occurred Before Any Definitive Merits Adjudication—Santisas Governed.      In German American Capital Corp. v. 1495 Pacific Highway, LLC, Case No. D063446 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 24, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiff sued on some loan documents, asking for appointment of a receiver and judicial foreclosure, among other things, based on deeds of trust containing

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

Scroll to Top