Alter Ego and Kindred Successor Theories Treated Alike Under Section 1717. We reported on Brown Bark III v. Haver, Case No. G047198 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 26, 2013) (unpublished) in our September 2, 2013 post, where a fee denial was reversed with respect to a prevailing defendant alleged to be the successor […]
Fee Clauses Not Broad Enough to Support Tort Claim Wins, So Case Remanded to Fix Fees And Determine If Any Apportionment Necessary. Brown Bark III, L.P. v. Haver, Case No. G047198 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 26, 2013) (unpublished) involved a defendant alleged to be the continuation of a defunct defendant signatory to
Pre-Appraisal Participation in Litigating Issues Meant Corp. Code Section 17351(b) Did Not Trump Broadly Worded Fees Clause. Kashian v. Simonian, Case No. F064325 (5th Dist. Aug. 28, 2013) (unpublished) was a business litigation war between two founding member sides of an LLC. Plaintiffs filed for fiduciary duty breach, declaratory relief, and LLC judicial
This next opinion, Karr v. Statewide Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 245147 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 23, 2013) (unpublished), has two interesting points: (1) a motion to vacate a summary judgment was not “on the contract” for Civil Code section 1717 fee recovery purposes given the existence of a narrow fees clause in
Neither One Obtained Sought-After Litigation Objectives. When a lower court has discretion to decide who the prevailing party is, unless the facts show otherwise, the abuse of discretion generally applies on appellate review and dictates the result. That is what happened here. In Barez v. Ni, Case No. H037572 (6th Dist. July
Court Can Award 1717 Fees With Enforceable Limitations–Such As, Did Adverse Party Acted Arbitrarily, Vexatiously, In Bad Faith Or Unreasonably–You Bethca! We like Abbey v. Fortune Drive Associates, LLC, Case No. A135062 (1st Dist., Div. 1 July 29, 2013) (unpublished) for a lot, if not a couple of, reasons: (1) it talks about
This Case Cuts Across Several Issue Categories. Two painted bronze “golfers” compare notes. Carol M. Highsmith Collection. Library of Congress. Masters v. Burton, Case Nos. B234555/B239447 (2d Dist., Div. 6 July 25, 2013) (unpublished) is a case about errant golf balls and litigation claiming concealment of the golf ball “hazard” in connection with
Primary Right Showed Contractual Dispute Involved. In CT Glendale, LLC v. Liu, Case No. B241445 (2d Dist., Div. 2 July 17, 2013) (unpublished), plaintiff obtained $37,612 in Civil Code section 1717 contractual fees in a litigation dispute interpreting which party owned cabinetry under a settlement agreement also containing a fees clause. Plaintiff won
Defendant Recovered Less on Cross-Complaint Contractual Claim, So Plaintiffs Prevailed. Julius Castle Restaurant, Inc. v. Payne, Case Nos. A130955 (1st Dist., Div. 1 June 10, 2013) (partially published; fee discussion not published) may be one of the first published cases discussing post-Riverisland factors for the courts and juries to consider after the overruling
"Alex," prize German police dog and pet of Miss Ailsa Mellon, daughter of Treas. smokes cigarettes n’everything. Alex’s father is the $12,000 prize police dog "Wolfe". 1924. Library of Congress. In our April 27, 2013 post, we explored Tobacco I, an April 23 unpublished decision out of the Fourth District, Division 1 dealing with
