Cases: Section 1717

Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Successor Trust Deed Lender Entitled To Attorney’s Fees Recovery Against Extinguished Lienholder Based On “Practical Liability” Section 1717 Doctrine

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Saucedo Case Found to Support Fee Recovery.      Saucedo v. Mercury Sav. & Loan Assn., 111 Cal.App.3d 309, 315 (1980) is an interesting section 1717 decision where plaintiffs (nonassuming grantees) of a property subject to a note/trust deed beat the lender under loan documents with a fees clause. Plaintiffs were allowed fee recovery because, […]

Section 1717: $142,000 Out Of Requested $316,335 In Fees Awarded To Party Achieving Litigation Objective, Although Only One-Third Of Requested Damages

Cases: Section 1717

  Discretionary Call on Prevailing Party Was Given Deference.      Wertheim, LLC v. Currency Corp., Case No. B218547 (2d Dist., Div. 1 May 22, 2012) (unpublished) was a loan dispute donnybrook with some wild assignment issues and the prevailing party basically winning the argument that lender charged more in interest and fees than was permitted

Deeds Of Trust/Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717: Prevailing Lender Either Did Make Sufficient Demand For Payment Of Fees/Costs Or Demand Requirement Excused

Cases: Deeds of Trust, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

  $101,380 Fee Award Affirmed in Case Where $220,978.34 Monetary Judgment Was Entered Earlier.      Defendant borrowers lost a judicial foreclosure proceeding, an equitable claim that was bifurcated and heard first by the trial court, to the tune of $220,978.34, plus attorney’s fees and costs based on fee clauses in the operative loan documents. Later,

Reasonableness Of Fees/Section 1717: Fees Spent On Extraneous Matters Not Entitled To Compensation Where Separate Entities And Separate Case Involved

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717

  Case Is One Involving Fee Recovery By Public Agency.      Okay, so a public agency did prevail and recover fees in a dispute in Wilshire Ventures Corp. v. City of San Fernando Redevelopment Agency, Case Nos. B230916/B232924 (2d Dist., Div. 1 May 9, 2012) (unpublished). Public agency was entitled to fees under a written

Allocation/Fee Clause Interpretation/Section 1717/Reasonableness Of Fees: $158,000 Fee Award Is Result To Winning Defendants In Cremation Intermingling Dispute

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717

  No Apportionment of Fee Work Required Where Both Contract and Tort Claims Encompassed Within a Broad Fees Clause.      Above:  Beware the Jabberwock, my son!  Sir John Tenniel, illustrator.       Beware of the broadly worded fee clause, because it likely will give rise to fee entitlement no matter whether contract or tort theories are

Prevailing Party/Section 1717/Section 998: Unlicensed Alarm Company Subject To Fee Exposure After Losing To Customer Under Contract With Fee Clause

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

  Also, Customer Sent 998 Offer Not Beaten by Alarm Company.      Justice Fybel, on behalf of a 3-0 panel of our local Santa Ana appellate court in Emergency Technologies, Inc. v. Garcia, Case No. G045685 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 4, 2012) (unpublished), affirmed a $41,162 fee award to a customer arising out of

Allocation/Section 1717: Even Though Two Distinct Contracts Existed (With Only One Subject To A Fees Clause), All Fees Were Recoverable Because Work Related To Defensing The Nonrecoverable Oral Contract Claim Was Essential To Resolving The Recoverable Wri

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

  No Allocation Required, Resulting in Affirmance of $318,469.82 Fee Award Where Jury Awarded Winner $71,443 In Compensatory Damages.     Rens Masonry, Inc. v. Luca Properties, Inc., Case No. D057698 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 1, 2012) (unpublished) is an interesting decision which affirmed a $318,469.32 fee award to the winning plaintiff contractor after the

Arbitration/Prevailing Party/Section 1717: Prevailing Party On Sole Contract Claim Entitled To Fees

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  “Each Side Bear Own Costs” Appellate Directive Did Not Bar Later Fee Request.      Tenzera, Inc. v. Osterman, Case No. B228189 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 19, 2012) (partially published; fee discussion not published) presented a situation where, after remand from a prior appellate opinion in the same case, a trial court denied attorney’s

Section 1717/Reasonableness Of Fees: Promissory Note With Fees Clause Was “Action On The Contract” In Trust Deed Cancellation, Quiet Title, Declaratory Relief, Injunctive, Fraud And Slander Of Title Action

Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Section 1717

  Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute Did Make Defendant the Prevailing Party.      In Halamandaris v. Sephos, Case No. C065819 (3d Dist. Apr 18, 2012) (unpublished), plaintiff’s action for the various claims described in our heading above was dismissed for failure to prosecute. The backdrop for all claims was a promissory note with a fees

Scroll to Top