Cases: Section 1717

Section 1717: Bank’s Assignee On Open Book Account Not Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Under Sections 1717 Or Section 1717.5(c)

Cases: Section 1717

  No Written Contract—No 1717 Fees; Banks And Assignees—No Go Under 1717(c).      In Professional Collection Consultants v. Brown, Case No. B270128 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Jan. 17, 2017) (unpublished), bank’s assignee (collection consultants) requested the trial judge to award it $148,792 in contractual attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717 or $800 in statutory

Fee Clause Interpretation, Prevailing Party, Section 1717, Allocation: Trial Court Erred In Awarding All Defense Fees Against Voluntarily Dismissing Plaintiff Under Santisas, Requiring Remand And Allocation

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

However, Prevailing Defense Was Entitled To Fees For Tort Claim Work Given Breadth Of Contractual Fees Clause.     A trial judge in Khan v. Shim, Case No. H041608 (6th Dist. Dec. 29, 2016) (published) granted the prevailing defense all fees for defensive work incurred in defending against a complaint containing both contractual and tort claims following

Allocation/Section 1717: Lower Court Erred In Denying Fees To Prevailing Defendant Under Section 1717 Based On “Unity Of Interest” Principle Applicable To Other Unsuccessful Defendants

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

  However, Apportionment Was Required On Remand—Consideration Of Many Factors.     In Bank of Southern California, N.A. v. D&D Goryoka, Inc., Case No. D069767 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 29, 2016) (unpublished), defendant/cross-complainant was denied a prevailing party fee request as against plaintiff/cross-defendant Bank to the tune of a $908,171.25 request (later reduced to $795,753). 

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: $152,791.50 Fee Award To Prevailing Defendants, Even Though One Of The Defendants Also Only Won One Out Of Four Cross-Claims, Sustained On Appeal.

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Prevailing Party Determination Was A Discretionary One For Lower Court.     In Enayat v. Missaghi, Case No. B260861 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Nov. 17, 2016) (unpublished), defendants won a “waste” lease dispute against a plaintiff alleging two tort claims, and one of the defendants also won on a slander cross-claim (resulting in $1 nominal

Section 1717, Special Fee Shifting Statute: Defendants Winning Verbal Contract Restaurant Purchase Dispute Not Entitled To Fee Recovery Under Section 1717

Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  However, Defense Was Entitled To Open Book Account Fees Under Civil Code Section 1717.5.     c1880.  Library of Congress.      Defendants, the putative buyers of a restaurant business known as Bosco’s Bones & Brew in Sunol, CA, were sued by plaintiffs/putative sellers in Alevamare, Inc. v. Truong, Case A144337 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Oct.

Costs/Section 1717: Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Prevailing On Claims Involving Limited Partnership Interpretation Entitled To Section 1717 Fees

Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 1717

  Reversed Denial of Fees; However, Denial Of Costs Award Was Proper In “Mixed” Case Involving Nondiscretionary And Discretionary Cost Categorical Results.     Chima v. Chima, Case No. C075602 (3d Dist. Oct. 31, 2016) (unpublished) is a situation where children beneficiaries under a trust, as plaintiffs/cross-defendants, prevailed in a suit where their father’s step-wife, on

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Nonsignatory Defendant Granted Vacation Of Default Judgment 22 Years Later Not Entitled To Fee Recovery Under Contractual Clauses Of Purchase Agreement And Promissory Note

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Court Of Appeal Determines Neither Narrow Clauses Nor Tort Claims Triggered Fee Entitlement.     In the area of fee recovery, a claimant must show fee entitlement, which generally focuses on a precise analysis of the fee clause wording and the claims upon which fees are sought.  The 2/1 DCA decided that a nonsignatory defendant

Section 1717: Voluntary Dismissal Under Santisas Cannot Be Overcome By Contrary Fee Entitlement Wording

Cases: Section 1717

  Plus, Sublease Fee Clause Failing To Incorporate Master Lease Broader Fee Provisions Also Required Denial Of Fee Request.     In Sancarrow Associates v. Hermanson, Case No. G051276 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 26, 2016) (unpublished), landlord voluntarily dismissed a contractually-oriented unlawful detainer complaint against sublessees, which prompted them to move to recovery contractual attorney’s

Allocation/Section 1717: Broadly-Worded Fees Clause Allowed Defrauded Residential Purchasers To Garner $345,539.19 In Costs/Attorney’s Fees Against Losing Defendant/Sellers

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

  Damages Were A Little Over $180,000.     Just to illustrate that attorney’s fees under Civil Code section 1717 do not have to be proportional to the awarded compensatory damages, we now post on Pec v. Brackenbury, Case No. A142104 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 20, 2016) (unpublished).     There, residential property purchasers/plaintiff prevailed on

Section 1717 And Poof!: Plaintiff Timely Dismissed Contract-Based Claims To Avoid 1717 Exposure Before Terminating Sanctions Hearing Was Decided

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Section 1717

  Terminating Sanctions Motion Was Not On The Merits, So Voluntarily Dismissal Was Timely For Fee Avoidance Purposes. Skating on ice.  Irving Brokaw, c1908-1916.  Library of Congress.     Timing can be everything, as the next case demonstrates.     In Liu v. Trask, Case No. B258112 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 15, 2016) (unpublished), plaintiff eventually

Scroll to Top