Cases: Section 1717

Section 1717/Settlement: $82,174.25 Fee Award To Successors/Assigns Under Settlement Agreement Sustained Fee Recovery

Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Settlement

  Trial Court Based It On Wrong Document, But Settlement Agreement Confirmed the Result.      In Jayaweera v. Lansberg, Case No. D065800 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 25, 2014) (unpublished), a trial court awarded a certain side prevailing in an easement dispute $82,174.25 in attorney’s fees under a Declaration of Restrictions (easement), a ruling challenged […]

Prevailing Party/Section 998/Section 1717/Reasonableness Of Fees/Celebrities: $125,000 Fee Award To Landlord Under Section 1717 Affirmed, Rejecting Defense Challenges To 998 Rejection Arguments

Cases: Celebrities, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

  However, “Prevailing” Landlord Did Not Garner 998 Postoffer Expert Fees or Get More Fees, In Case Implicitly Founded “Over Litigated” By Lower Court—With Landlord Trying To Get $365,000-$387,000 In Fees.      If you have followed us over the years (we thank you for those that have, hoping we have provided some insights, or welcome

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Contract Illegality Doomed Fee Recovery Under Purchase Agreement, But Attorney’s Fees Denial Reversed Under Option Agreement Fees Clause

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  A 2-1 Decision, With Majority Holding Novation Defense Fell Within Fee Clause Ambit, And With Dissent Arguing No Fees Entitled Under Option Fees Clause So Trial Court Properly Denied Fees.      At its core, Mountain Air Enterprises, LLC v. Sundowner Towers, LLC, Case No. A138306 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Nov. 20, 2014) (published) is

Costs/Section 1717/Prevailing Party/Poof!: Former Client Prevailing In Fee Arbitration/Bench Trial Was Prevailing Party, Such That $ 1.16 Million Fee Award Against Client And In Favor Of Former Attorney Reversed As A Matter Of Law

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

  Sears v. Baccaglio Decision Found Not Viable CCP § 1032 “Prevailing Party” Law.      This one is an interesting one under section 1717/CCP § 1032 routine costs jurisprudence.      Here, client at first suffered a default judgment of $86,676.88 in favor of former attorney, but client obtained relief from the default judgment from the

Estoppel/Section 1717: Nonsignatories To Operating Agreement Not Entitled To Fee Recovery

Cases: Estoppel, Cases: Nonsignatories, Cases: Section 1717

  Recovery on Fiduciary Duty Aiding/Abetting Count Not Justify Fees, Even Though Plaintiff Recovered $7.1 Million Jury Verdict.      Plaintiff recovering a $7.1 million jury verdict on a fiduciary duty aiding/abetting count was not happy when a fees motion was denied. Plaintiff appealed from the fee denial in American Master Lease LLC v. Idanta Partners

Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717/Nonsignatories: Individual Non-Signatory Plaintiff Hit With Fee Exposure Based On Breadth Of Fee Clause

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Nonsignatories, Cases: Section 1717

    $370,850 Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal.        In Bribiesca v. Pacific Perfusion, Inc., Case No. D063256 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 17, 2014) (unpublished), a losing individual plaintiff appealed a contractual fees award of $370,850 in favor of the defense. Plaintiff’s appeal did not succeed in reducing the award.      The first

Deeds Of Trust/Section 1717: Junior Lienholders Stepping Into Shoes Of Primary Residential Obligors Had Fee Exposure To Winning Senior Lienholders

Cases: Deeds of Trust, Cases: Section 1717

  Nonsignatory Junior Lienholders Effectively “Stepped Into Shoes” of Primary Obligors.      Skordoulis v. Fidelity Nat’l Title Co., Case No. D065947 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 9, 2014) (unpublished) is a nice example of “be careful of what you ask for/what you lose” when an attorney fee battle happens after you as a litigant do

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Plaintiffs Winning Cancellation Of Foreclosure But Losing Case Ultimately Were Properly Denied Fees As Prevailing Party

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Record Showed Plaintiffs Pursued Other Claims Unsuccessfully, So SJM Against Them Meant Litigation Objectives Not Achieved.      Plaintiffs did win a battle when defendant lender-oriented parties stipulated to stay foreclosure proceedings pending the outcome of the litigation initiated by plaintiffs.      However, plaintiffs lost the merits of the suit based on demurrer and ultimate

Deadlines/Section 1717: Party Seeking Contractual Fees Need Not File Costs Memorandum In Addition To Noticed Motion For Purposes Of Seeking Fees

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Section 1717

  Nothing in Statues Require Costs Memo Filing, With CRC 3.1702 Governing.      In ruling on a first impression issue on the published level, Kaufman v. Diskeeper Corp., Case No. B 248151 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 21, 2014) (published) decided that a party seeking contractual fees under Civil Code section 1717 need not, in

Scroll to Top