. . . After All, Prevailing Party Status Had To Await Determination On a Retrial. So, what happens when defendants appeal a denial of Civil Code section 1717 fees against one plaintiff, who successfully obtains an appellate reversal because an affiliated party was not added as a party pursuant to a motion to
Fee Motion Properly Filed and No Allocation Between Claims Required. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its contract-based/tortious interference case against one defendant without prejudice in the wake of pending pleading motions, with the trial court determining that fully requested fees of $16,926 were due to prevailing defendant. Plaintiff’s multi-pronged attack in Oxnard Corner, LLC
Plaintiff Got Unqualified Win, With No Apportionment Needed; Two Winning Defendants Failed To Timely File For Costs. This case stirred our curiosity, because it involves Veris Cellars, which appears to be a very nice winery located in the Paso Robles area in San Luis Obispo County. However, no matter who the litigant, beware
District Court Also Denied Plaintiff’s Requests for Sanctions After Defendant Withdrew Rule 11 Motion After Grant of Voluntary Dismissal; Reasons For Both — No Prevailing Party. The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365, allows citizen suits and has a fee-shifting clause which allows a district court, in its discretion, to award litigation
Basis for Fee Recovery Was Family Code Section 8638(c). In Bates v. Kors, Case No. D063123 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 27, 2013) (unpublished), registered adoption facilitator defendants obtained a statutory fee award of $14,760 against plaintiffs, parents attempting to adopt a surrogate baby, under Family Code section 8638(c). Section 8638(c) allows a
Some Fee Recoveries Went POOF, Some Stayed, and Some Will Be Re-Done. Kirk v. Dimitri, Case No. D058758 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 13, 2013) (unpublished) was a multi-party case arising from a failed residential real estate venture in Fallbrook. Ultimately, a jury and then a court in an equitable trial entered various
Briefing Looks Completed; Issue Is Whether Procedural Victory Based on Federal Exclusive Jurisdiction Entitles Litigant to Prevailing Party Status Under Civil Code Section 1717. On both September 22, 2012 and December 27, 2012, we posted on Kandy Kiss of California, Inc. v. Tex-Ellent, Inc., a Second District decision affirming an award of attorney’s
Appellate Court Followed Maughan’s “Bright Line” Test on Appeal. In this one, the appellate court had to review whether a party truly prevailed on appeal in a prior appellate proceeding involving a SLAPP determination. The lower court said the party did, but the appellate court reversed. White and Yellow Cab, Inc. v.
In Demakas v. Guibault, Case No. A137144 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Aug. 23, 2013) (unpublished), a plaintiff voluntarily dismissed a complaint containing both contract and tort claims. The trial court actually awarded $20,000 in fees to the non-dismissing party. This one was reversed. The dismissal of the contract claims did not give
Be Careful in Saying “Thank You.” HPSC, Inc. v. Tiffany, Case No. D061142 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 19, 2013) (unpublished) is a situation where one defendant was dismissed upon an oral motion after a summary judgment argument, with the court expressly indicating the defendant was dismissed upon the condition that both sides
