Cases: Prevailing Party

Civil Code Section 1717: Court of Appeal Reverses Fee Award Given That Neither Side Prevailed Under The Contract

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

Fifth District Overturns Based on a Pragmatic Assessment of Litigation Results.      Who says that appellate courts are not pragmatic in their assessment of who prevailed for purposes of awarding attorney’s fees? That is the law after all, and the next case is an illustration of where a cause was reversed because neither side prevailed […]

Civil Code Section 1717: Litigants’ Failure To Be Adjudged General Partners, Although Winning A Small Quantum Meruit Award, Justified Non-prevailing Party Conclusion

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Estoppel, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717

Result Was An Adverse Fee/Cost Award of Over $275,000      In Gupta v. Shue, Case No. B198449 (Apr. 30, 2009) (unpublished), both sides engaged in bitter, protracted litigation over whether each received, by assignment, a general partnership interest in a real estate limited partnership—with the limited partnership caught in the middle of the litigation. After

Arbitration: Appellate Fees Awardable Upon Prior Reversal Without Awaiting the Final Result

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Costs, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party

Second District Panel Splits 2-1 on Whether Contractual Clause Allowed for Fee Recovery From Post-Arbitration Judicial Proceeding Win Before the “Dispute” Was Finally Resolved.      The next case illustrates how even appellate jurists will come to different conclusions when construing a contractual fees clause where the matter is one for de novo review based on

Civil Code Section 1717: Fee Award Reversed Because Prevailing Party Determination Is Different Than The Standard For Adjudging An Award Of Routine Costs

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

Second District, Division 7 Remands for Further Fee Proceedings.      City of Los Angeles won attorney’s fees against a replacement contractor selected by a bonding surety, where surety and replacement contractor entered into contractual agreements incorporating original agreements between City and the replaced contractor. Replacement contractor lost in the construction litigation, with the trial court

Homeowner Associations: “No Prevailing Party” Determination Means No Fee Award For Either Side In Mold Insurance Proceeds Dispute

Cases: Homeowner Associations, Cases: Prevailing Party

Ruling Affirmed Where Homeowner Spent Fees of At Least $35,088.50 and HOA Spent At Least $92,335.25.      In our category “Cases: Homeowner Associations,” we have examined numerous contests between homeowners and homeowner associations (HOA) in common interest developments where attorney’s fees are often the real battle because most CC&Rs and Civil Code section 1354 allow

Withdrawn Cross-Claim Subject to Fee Shifting Means No Prevailing Party Under Retention “Prompt Payment” Statute

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Owners Did Not Prevail Because Contractor Withdrew Cross-Claim During Deposition and Never Pursued Recovery Under It.      Courts like to encourage narrowing of disputes by litigants. The next case illustrates how a non-prevailing contractor avoided attorney’s fees exposure under Civil Code section 3260(g), which authorizes fees/costs to the prevailing party involving a claim that

Buyer Of Used Car Awarded Attorney’s Fees Of $28,591.50 Under The Automobile Sales Finance Act

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Court of Appeal Finds No Prejudice In the Sequence of Entry of the Fee Award.      The Automobile Sales Finance Act (ASFA), in Civil Code section 2983.4, has a mandatory fee-shifting provision by which the prevailing party in any action on a contract or purchase subject to the ASFA must be awarded fees, “regardless of

Television Provider Winning $1,591.38 From A Jury And A Court Injunction Is Awarded About $8.3 Million in Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

    District Judge Carter Awards Both Sides Fees Under the California Penal Code, the Communications Act, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.      This next one is an interesting illustration of how each side can prevail and be awarded fees/costs under state and federal statutes, yet how one side can still be the “net”

Civil Code Section 1717: Fees Are Not Awardable Where Plaintiff Dismisses Action With Prejudice After The Start of Trial

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

Second District, Division Four Also Rejects That Letter Containing Purported CCP Section 998 Offer Was Valid Where Opposing Party Not Given Full Statutory Period Within Which to Accept.      Presiding Justice Epstein, writing for a 3-0 panel of the Second District, Division Four, recently authored an interesting opinion in which attorney’s fees were not allowed

Scroll to Top