Cases: Section 1717

Section 1717 And Integrated Contracts: Separate Operative Contract With No Fees Clause Justified Denial Of Fee To Prevailing Parties In Contract Suit Involving Numerous Agreements

Cases: Section 1717

  Integration Finding is Factual, With the Trial Court’s Determination Being Binding on Appeal.      Whether several contracts relating to the same matters and between the same parties are integrated is a factual question. As the next decision we look at demonstrates, the resolution of this initial question may also dispose of a decision on […]

CCP § 998 and CC § 1717: $60,270 Fee Award Affirmed Where Plaintiff Only Recovered $7,477.01

Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

  Second District, Division 7 Examines the Interplay Between Two Statutory Schemes.      There is a definite interplay between Civil Code section 1717 (allowing recovery to a prevailing party where there is a contractual fees clause) and Code of Civil Procedure section 998 (California’s offer to judgment statute). Where a party might otherwise be considered

Section 1717: Appellate Court Remittitur Choice To Respondent On Damages Requires Reconsideration of Fee Award

Cases: Assignment, Cases: Section 1717

Fourth District, Division 3 Remands Fee Recovery Under Unusual Procedural Circumstances.      Here is an interesting decision with a procedural twist—with apologies to Chubby Checker (oh, boy, are we dating ourselves).      Chubby Checker does the Twist.      In Nguyen v. Dang, Case Nos. G041224/G041380 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 11, 2010) (unpublished), a signatory

Section 1717 And Fees Clause Interpretation: Fee Denials Against Apartment Seller And Escrow Company Reversed And Remanded For Reconsideration

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

  Second District, Division 7 Finds Reversal of Prejudgment Interest Issue Requires Reexamination of Prevailing Party Determination and the Escrow Instructions Fee Clauses Were Sufficiently Broad for Fee Entitlement Purposes      In Marina Glencoe, L.P. v. Malibu Escrow Corp., Case No. B203415 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 1, 2010) (unpublished), an apartment building purchaser recovered

Section 1717: No Error In Awarding Fees Jointly and Severally Against Two Companies Where Property Seller Remained In Unlawful Detainer Action

Cases: Section 1717

Fourth District, Division 3 Finds Nothing Wrong With “Joint and Several” Judgment.      Plaintiff sold its property and assigned its rights under a lease with a particular tenant to another company becoming a co-plaintiff in an unlawful detainer action eventually won by defendant tenant. There was a fees clause, with the lower court awarding over

Section 1717: No Basis For Fee Recovery Where Operative Contract Had No Fees Clause, Even Though Later Contract Did Have Fees Clause

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Section 1717

  Analysis of Fee Recovery Under Multiple Agreements Must Focus On Contract With Fee Clause Predicate.      Many decisions we have examined in the past under Civil Code section 1717 involve situations where multiple contracts (some with fees clauses and some without) are part of an integrated transaction or where apportionment between contract/noncontract claims was

Jurisdiction To Award Fees And Prevailing Party Status: Borrower Substantially Reducing Loan Exposure Through Usury Defense Awarded Fees Of $43,960

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Trial Court Had Jurisdiction to Award Fees While Merits Appeal Pending and Borrower Was the Prevailing Party.      Borrower on a loan, even after an initial appeal, reduced a loan balance to only $3,602.72 after an offset for usurious interest. The lower court refused to award costs to lender and also awarded $43,960 to borrower

Civil Code Section 1717: Attorney’s Fees Awarded To Assignor And Against Assignee Reversed Where Nothing Showed Ability to Recoup Fees From the Assignment Relationship

Cases: Section 1717

Mutuality Principle Did Not Kick In Where No Basis For Fee Recovery Existed Between Assignor and Assignee.      Civil Code section 1717’s mutuality principle is well renowned and followed frequently. However, it will not even come into operation if there is no basis for the nonprevailing party to have recovered any contractual fees from the

Scroll to Top