Cases: Section 1717

Bankruptcy/Section 1717: Bankruptcy Judge Erroneously Denied Debtor’s Requests For Recovery Of Fees After Defeating Car Lender’s “Hanging Paragraph” Secured Interest Claim In Chapter 13 Plan Confirmation Battle

Cases: Bankruptcy Efforts, Cases: Section 1717

  “Hanging Paragraph” Claim Was “On The Contract” Under A Fees Clause.      In In re Penrod, No. 13-16097 (9th Cir. Oct. 1, 2015) (unpublished), debtor was successful against a car lender in a “hanging paragraph” dispute under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(*) [no typo here – because this subsection was not numbered after (a)(9) by […]

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Refusal To Award Escrow Holder Fees Under Escrow/Other Transactional Documents Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Escrow Holder Entitled to Fee Against Losing Broker.     When it comes to contractual agreements not subject to any extrinsic evidence, appellate courts will construe them independently to see if fee entitlement was either properly granted or denied.  In Nelson v. Peirce, Case No. B250609 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 29, 2015) (unpublished), the

Appealability/Costs/Deadlines/Section 1717: Trifecta Of Unpublished Decisions On Various Fee/Costs Issues

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Costs, Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Section 1717

  Costs—CEQA Record Preparation:  North County Advocates v. City of Carlsbad, Case No. D066488 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 10, 2015) (Unpublished).     In this first case, the appellate court reversed and remanded a costs award in favor of City in a costs award with respect to certain record preparation costs.  The takeaways here are

Cases Under Review/Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Mountain Air Decision Pending For Review By California Supreme Court

Cases: Cases Under Review, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  Split Opinion Decided Novation Defense Was “On The Contract” For Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717 Purposes.      On November 21, 2014, we posted on Mountain Air Enterprises, LLC v. Sundowner Towers, LLC, 2014 WL 6488418 (Nov. 20, 2014) [1st Dist., Div. 2; majority opinion by Stewart, J. and dissenting opinion by Richman, J.], which held

Choice of Law/Section 1717: Ninth Circuit, In Diversity Case, Affirms Fee Award Under Bank Loan Documents Even Though Georgia Choice-Of-Law Clause Involved

Cases: Choice of Law, Cases: Section 1717

  California Choice of Law Principles Governed, With Ninth Circuit Believing California Supreme Court Would Decide 1717 Evinces Fundamental State Policy.     In one of our early posts on June 11, 2008, we talked about Civil Code section 1717—which makes unilateral contractual fees clauses reciprocal in nature—and its interplay with choice of law decision—decisions considering

Costs, Prevailing Party, Section 1717: Plaintiff Tenants Obtaining CAM Credits And Monetary Settlement Were Prevailing Parties

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

  They Did Get $76,000 In Fees And $16,961 In Costs, But Not Anything More—Plaintiffs’ Behavior In Settlement Negotiations Found To Be Irrelevant For Fixing 1717 Fees.      Some of the gnarly cases involve those where there is no “unqualified winner” under Civil Code section 1717 as far as fees (although a winner for routine

Costs, Deeds Of Trust, Fee Clause Interpretation, Prevailing Party, Section 1717: Deed Of Trust Trustee Did Prevail Under Civil Code Section 1717 Where It Defensed Tort Claims And It Took Neutral Position On Contractual Claim Under Broadly Worded Fees Cla

Cases: Costs, Cases: Deeds of Trust, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: POOF!, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  POOF!:  Award of Fees/Costs To Plaintiff Reversed, With Remand To Award Fees/Costs To Prevailing Trustee.      Torigian v. WT Capital Lender Services, Case No. F068393 (5th Dist. June 24, 2015) (unpublished) is an interesting unpublished decision, authored by Acting Presiding Justice Cornell, where a neutral trustee under a deed of trust was found to

Section 1717: Defendant Tenant Prevailing On Rent Control Ordinance/Rent Rate Declaratory Relief Claim Entitled To Fee Recovery

Cases: Landlord/Tenant, Cases: Section 1717

  Lower Court Erred In Refusing To Award Fees Under Fees Clause Which Encompassed Landlord’s Declaratory Relief Claim.      Earlier, tenant had won both trial and appellate court victories on the theory that landlord’s substantial rent increase violated local L.A. rent control ordinances, with landlord instigating things primarily through a declaratory relief-oriented action which landlord

Section 1717, Non-signatories, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Nonsignatory Defendant Entitled To Fee Recovery Based On Statute Which Would Have Made Him Personally Liable For Signatory’s Obligations

Cases: Nonsignatories, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Impact of Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act Liability Considered By Appellate Panel.        Plaintiff (produce seller) sued a restaurant (Jack’s La Jolla) and its controlling officer Berkley to recover monies owed for the produce, claiming that Berkley had signed a guaranty and Berkley was subject to personal liability for restaurant’s contractual obligations (under an

Prevailing Party, Section 1717: Fee Clause Language Allowing Isolated Fee Recovery On Appellate Win Is Trumped By Section 1717’s Overall Prevailing Party Mandate

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Sixth District Rejects Notion that CCP § 1021 Prevails Over Civil Code § 1717.      This next case is interesting given that we have posted on some California unpublished decisions suggesting that fee entitlement is not at issue in Civil Code section 1717, with the provision only governing fairness and treatment of unilateral fee

Scroll to Top