Cases: Section 1717

Appealability/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Defense Properly Denied Attorney’s Fees Because She Was Not The Clear Winner

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Easement Dispute Produced Mixed Result, Likely More Pro-Plaintiffs In Nature. ​This one involved a water well easement dispute by adjoining owners, prompting a suit by plaintiffs when defendant locked the pump house and put up a “no trespassing” sign. The lower court ultimately upheld plaintiffs’ right to use of some water from the well, but […]

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: $90,000 Fee Award To The Defense For Prevailing On Provisional Receiver/Injunction Requests Reversed Where Plaintiff Voluntarily Dismissed Without Prejudice

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Dismissal Occurred Before Any Definitive Merits Adjudication—Santisas Governed.      In German American Capital Corp. v. 1495 Pacific Highway, LLC, Case No. D063446 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 24, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiff sued on some loan documents, asking for appointment of a receiver and judicial foreclosure, among other things, based on deeds of trust containing

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Landlord Winning 72.36% Of Fee Recovery Based On Tenant Responsibility Was Entitled To Fee Recovery Of $21,372.25

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Prevailing Party Is A Discretionary Determination Where No One Is A Clear Winner.      2845 Monterey Road, LLC v. Posada, Case No. H039053 (6th Dist. June 23, 2014) (unpublished) is a discretionary “prevailing party” determination under a landlord-tenant dispute with a lease having a fees clause. Ultimately, landlord seemed to prevail, but not by

Allocation/Section 1717: $41,350 Fee Award Reversed Because Only One Claim Was “On The Contract” Under 1717 And No Apportionment Decisions Made By Lower Court

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

  Silence in the Record as to Apportionment Required Remand.      The Third District in Painter v. Francis Realty, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan, Case No. C073864 (3d Dist. June 23, 2014) (unpublished) considered a situation where a borrower under a promissory note/deed of trust brought multiple causes of action against creditor. The problem was that

Estoppel/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Long-Standing Dispute Over L.A. Metro Red Line Subway Performance Looks Like It Is Winding To A Conclusion

Cases: Estoppel, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Fee Exposure Frenzy Did Play Out on Appeal.      Tutor-Saliba-Perini J.V. v. L.A. County Metro. Transp. Auth., Case No. B232372 (2d Dist., Div. 7 June 16, 2014) (unpublished) ultimately came down to a situation of what party might obtain attorney’s fees in a two decades battle over compensation owed for work on the Los

POOF!/Retainer Agreement/Prevailing Party and Section 1717: Appellate Court’s Reversal of Fee Disgorgement Order Meant Remand Necessary To See Who Prevailed

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717

  Client’s Fee/Costs Recovery of $688,634 Goes POOF! For Now.      In Fleischman v. Law Office of Paul Stanton, Case No. B216898 (2d Dist., Div. 8 June 12, 2014) (unpublished), which involved nasty conservatorship/elder abuse claims among trust beneficiaries with respect to a deceased trustee, client was able to invalidate a retainer agreement which placed

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: After 15 Years Of Controversy, Appellate Court Affirms Decision That Defendant/Cross-Complainant Did Not Prevail For Purposes of 1717 Fee Recovery

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Both Sides Partially Succeeded, So Lower Court’s Ruling Was No Abuse of Discretion.      The next case illustrates how appellate courts will defer to the lower court’s determination that there was no prevailing party for Civil Code section 1717 fee recovery unless there was a truly unqualified winner, with the result climaxing an apparent

Allocation/Reasonableness Of Fees/Section 1717: $125,000 Fee Recovery By Plaintiff On Rescission Claim Was “On The Contract” Under Section 1717

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717

  However, Fee Recovery Modified to Allow Recovery Against Only Losing Signatory Defendant.      Plaintiff, after losing her investment in a security, sued various parties involved in its sales and packaging, with a jury ultimately awarding her $196,058.33 on fraud, fiduciary duty breach, negligence, and negligent misrepresentation claims. The lower court then awarded $125,000 (out

Appealability/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Because Lower Court Erred In Sustaining Demurrer, Party Garnering Fee Award Was Not Prevailing Party

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  $22,230 Fee Award Went POOF!      In Vestar/Kimco Tustin, L.P. V. Sesar, Case No. G048831 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 30, 2014) (unpublished), the lower court sustained a demurrer to a breach of lease action and overruled a demurrer to a breach of guaranty cause of action, with plaintiff filing a voluntary dismissal of

Paralegals/Reasonableness Of Fees/Section 1717: Plaintiffs Not Prevailing On Purchase Deposit Retention Dispute Were Correctly Hit With $1,146,682 In Fee Exposure

Cases: Paralegal Time, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717

  Fee Clause Was Broad, But Lower Court Correctly Reduced Paralegal Hourly Rates—Finding $330 Per Hour Too High.      Royalty Alliance, Inc. v. Tarsadia Hotels, Case Nos. D062537/D063402 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 29, 2014) (unpublished) was a case where plaintiffs lost summary judgment motions challenging a developer’s retention of purchase deposits under various theories,

Scroll to Top