Cases: Section 1717

Sanctions, Section 1717: Failure To Provide Safe Harbor Notice And Combining 1717 Fee Request With Sanctions Motion Rendered $176,869 Award Infirm

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Section 1717

Prelitigation Conduct Does Not Justify 128.5 Sanctions Award, But Combo Motion Also Justified The Result.             In Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Structured Asset Sales, LLC (Currency Corp.), Case Nos. B272418/B278379 (2d Dist., Div. 2 July 30, 2019) (unpublished), the appellate court reversed a $176,869 CCP § 128.5 sanctions award against a client represented by co-contributor […]

Section 1717: Lack Of Contractual Relationship With A Fees Clause Doomed Cross-Defendant’s Recovery Of Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Section 1717

Cross-Defendant Sought, But Did Not Get, $352,790.50 In Fees.             Cardiodiagnostic Imaging Inc. (Cardio), whose president was Mr. Kay, sued two parties who eventually took over a commercial leased space when Cardio encountered business problems.  The two defendants denied that a business sale agreement had been reached with Cardio or Mr. Kay, but they brought

Section 1717: Borrower’s California Homeowners Bill Of Rights Claims Were Not “On The Contract” For Civil Code Section 1717 Fee Recovery Purposes

Cases: Section 1717

Borrower Did Not Invoke Directly The Terms of Agreements With Fee Clauses.             In Thomas v. Seterus, Inc., Case No. A155170 (1st Dist., Div. 2 July 2, 2019) (unpublished), lenders moved for post-trial attorney’s fees based on note and trust deed fees clauses against a borrower bringing claims based on the California Homeowners Bill of

Prevailing Party, Section 1717: Only One True Prevailing Party Can Exist Under Civil Code Section 1717

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

One Litigant Cannot Partially Prevail At Trial, And Another On Appeal, For Purposes Of Ultimate Prevailing Party Determination Under Section 1717.             The Sixth District in Gambord v. Galli Produce Co., Case No. H043872 (6th Dist. June 28, 2019) (unpublished) faced an interesting issue based on a contractual fees clause under Civil Code section 1717: 

Landlord-Tenant, Reasonableness Of Fees, Section 1717: $428,175 Fee Award To Winning Landlord In Tort Condo Damages/Fraud Case Against Tenants Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Landlord/Tenant, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717

Residential Security Deposit Scheme Did Not Preempt Tort Fee Award; But Landlord Correctly Reduced Landlord’s Fee Request Of $659,367.56 For Various Reasons             Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Weingart, sitting by assignment on the 2/1 DCA, has penned a nice decision in Sweeney v. Scully, Case No. B284915 (2d Dist., Div. 1 June 27,

Fee Clause Interpretation, Prevailing Party, Section 998, Section 1717: In A 2-1 Split Decision, 2/5 DCA Affirms $28,000 Contractual Fee Award To Prevailing Tenants Based On An Entered CCP § 998 Judgment And On Residential Lease Fee Provisions

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

Majority And Dissenting Justice Disagreed On The Meaning Of A $500 Fee Cap Provision When Another Provision Discussed Additional Fees Being Within Play.             We know from 511 S. Park View, Inc. v. Tsantis, 240 Cal.App.4th 44, 48 (2015) [discussed in our October 10, 2015 post] that courts will honor a contractual “cap” of fees

Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717: Fraud-Based Claim Upon Narrow Unilateral Fees Clause Was Not Broad Enough To Allow Fees To Prevailing Fraud Plaintiffs

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

However, Appellate Court Reversal Of Guaranty Rescission Denial Did Trigger Fee Recovery Under Broad Bilateral Fees Clause.             If readers follow us over the years (or if you are new to us, welcome), the actual wording of a contractual attorney’s fees clause can be critical in terms of whether it allows fee entitlement.  The disparate

Prevailing Party, Section 998, Section 1717: Host Of Section 1717 And 998 Issues Are Considered In Attorney’s Fees Dueling Requests

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

Equitable Claims Can Be “On The Contract,” Parties Losing On Their Complaint And Cross-Complaint Meant That Neither Side Prevailed; One Litigant Beat 998 Offer Based On Non-Monetary Value And The Fact That The Composite Joint Nature Of Offer Had To Be Considered, But Matter Had To Be Remanded For Prevailing Party Determination Based On An

Appeal Sanctions, Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717: Absence Of Appropriate Fees Clause Doomed Prevailing Defendants’ Request For $621,328.34 In Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

However, Plaintiffs/Appellants And Their Appellate Counsel Sanctioned $44,654.64 For Frivolous Appeal.             In J.B.B. Investment Partners Ltd. v. Fair, Case Nos. A152877/A153698 (1st Dist., Div. 2 June 4, 2019) (unpublished), plaintiffs prevailed on a breach of contract count through a summary adjudication motion based on defendants’ breach of a settlement agreement and a lot of

Employment, Section 1717: Labor Code § 218.5(a), Requiring Bad Faith For Losing Plaintiff In Wage Nonpayment Case To Face Fee Exposure, Prevails In Wage Claim Case Inextricably Intertwined With Contract Fees Clause Allowing Fees to Prevailing Employer

Cases: Employment, Cases: Section 1717

Section 218.5(a)’s Policy Prevailed Over Section 1717 In This Instance.             Dane-Elec Corp. v. Bodokh, Case No. G055312 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 24, 2019) (partially published; fee discussion published) involved the collision between two fee entitlement provisions—Labor Code section 218.5(a) and Civil Code section 1717.             Labor Code section 218.5(a) is a unilateral-fee shifting

Scroll to Top