Cases: Section 1717

Allocation, Fee Clause Interpretation, Prevailing Party, Section 1717:  Lease Rescission Claim Did Give Rise To Successful Fee Recovery To The Tune Of $418,730.75 In Fees And $16,260.79 In Costs In Tenant’s Favor

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

“Any Remedy Hereunder” Lease Language Salted Away The Result.             In The Redbean House Corp. v. Colonnade Wilshire Corp., Case No. B276837 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 16, 2017) (unpublished), tenant successfully obtained rescission of a commercial lease based on a substantial seismic retrofit issue, although landlord obtained $49,647 in damages for waste after a […]

Section 1717:  Nonsignatory Defendants Entitled To Fee Recovery Under Civil Code Section 1717

Cases: Nonsignatories, Cases: Section 1717

$61,565 Fee Award Sustained On Appeal             Nonsignatories defendants were awarded attorney’s fees of $61,565, drawing an appeal from the plaintiff in Westco Petroleum Distributors, Inc. v. Huntington Beach Industrial, Case No. B269393 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 10, 2017) (unpublished).  After surveying section 1717 jurisprudence which does allow fee recovery to nonsignatories like the

Deed Of Trust/Section 1717: Borrowers’ Fraudulent Inducement Claim Was Not “On The Contract” So As To Allow Recovery Under Deed Of Trust Fees Clause

Cases: Deeds of Trust, Cases: Section 1717

Characterization Of Borrowers’ Claim Was Determinative.             In Aniel v. American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., Case Nos. A141462/A142729 (1st Dist., Div. 4 July 21, 2017) (unpublished), borrowers challenged the nonjudicial foreclosure of rental property by alleging, but losing, a claim that lenders/related servicing entities fraudulently induced them to let the loan go into default so

Deed Of Trust/Section 1717: Borrowers’ Fraudulent Inducement Claim Was Not “On The Contract” So As To Allow Recovery Under Deed Of Trust Fees Clause

Cases: Deeds of Trust, Cases: Section 1717

Characterization Of Borrowers’ Claim Was Determinative.             In Aniel v. American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., Case Nos. A141462/A142729 (1st Dist., Div. 4 July 21, 2017) (unpublished), borrowers challenged the nonjudicial foreclosure of rental property by alleging, but losing, a claim that lenders/related servicing entities fraudulently induced them to let the loan go into default so

Section 1717: Fees As Damages Under Breach Of Contract Claim Must Be Decided By The Jury At Trial, Not The Trial Judge On Noticed Motion

Cases: Fees as Damages, Cases: Section 1717

Jury Right Implicated, With Brandt Being Persuasive On The Issue. Jury.  1918-20.  Library of Congress.             In Monster, LLC v. Superior Court (Beats Electronics, LLC), Case No. B278289 (2d Dist., Div. 7 June 21, 2017) (published), cross-complainant brought a breach of contract cross-claim, alleging that the cross-defendants had caused the company to incur attorney’s fees and

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Prevailing Seller Co-Conspirator Defendant In Real Estate Listing Dispute Properly Awarded Fees Under Broadly Worded Fees Clause

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

Section 1717 Reciprocity Principles Applied. Charlie Price Realtor donkey statue, Routes 62 & 82.  John Margolies, photographer.  1993.  Library of Congress.         In Impact Realty, Inc. v. Ortega, Case No. B272040 (2d Dist., Div. 1 June 14, 2017) (unpublished), real estate brokers sued a seller for breach of contract as well as sued a seller and

Section 1717:  Fee Recovery Under Stipulated Martial Settlement Agreement Governed By 1717 Principles, Not Family Law “Need” Precepts

Cases: Section 1717

    $30,308 Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal, Less Than Ex-Wife’s Request For $80,000.               In Marriage of Minkin, Case No. G052947 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 19, 2017 published; prior unpublished decision under date of April 24, 2017), the family law judge awarded $30,308 to ex-wife out of requested $80,000 in fees to

Prevailing Party/Section 1717:  Defendant Beating Primary Rescission/Restitution Claim Did Prevail For Purposes Of Section 1717 Despite Losing Cross-Claims

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

    Dispute Arose Over Filming Rights For Jimi Hendrix’s 1969 Performance At London’s Royal Albert Hall.   Photograph of Jimi Hendrix taken in Sweden.  May 24, 1967.  Wikipedia.                  Although unpublished, Experience Hendrix, LLC v. The Last Experience, Case No. B268414 (2d Dist., Div. 2 May 8, 2017) (unpublished) takes us down

Section 1717:  Prevailing Plaintiff’s Action To Rescind Car Contract Based On Fraud Was “On The Contract” Under Section 1717

Cases: Section 1717

  $80,806.50 Fee Award Affirmed Where $11,642.10 Compensatory Damages And Cancellation Of Car Loan Was The End Result.                Replica of first car made and sold by Toyota:  the 1936 Toyota Standard Sedan AA.  Photo:  Bertel Schmitt. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.             In Valencia v. Hooman Toyota of

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: California Supreme Court Affirms That Party Losing Forum Selection Clause Transfer, But Refiling In Different Jurisdiction, Is Not Subject To 1717 Fee Recovery

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Refiling The Case In A Different Jurisdiction Was The Key Distinction.       In DisputeSuite.com, LLC v. Scoreinc.com, Case No. S226652 (Cal. Supreme Court Apr. 6, 2017) (published), our state supreme court faced the issue of whether fee recovery under Civil Code section 1717 was properly denied against a litigant obtaining a dismissal of an

Scroll to Top