Appellate Court Decides That More Fees Would Be Unfair Because Half of Fees Paid By Another. Courts do apply equitable principles in awarding fees to victorious litigants under Civil Code section 1717, even where the winner was a last minute add-on litigant. The next case is one illustration of how equities enter into the […]
Second District, Division 4 Affirms $20,000 Fees/Cost Award to Alter Ego Winner. In Legacy Construction and Development, Inc. v. De Francesca, Case No. B208851 (2d Dist., Div. 4 July 13, 2009) (unpublished), a defendant, following presentation of plaintiff’s declaratory relief case, obtained a ruling that he was not the alter ego of a separate
Second District, Division 6 Also Interprets Mediation Requirement in CAR Form Contract. Buyers sometimes get confused over their obligations under CAR real estate form contracts, especially the ones involving an award of attorney’s fees (which clauses have been held to reach fraud/nondisclosure claims). One of the most frequent causes of confusion is the mediation
First District, Division 4 Follow Acosta-Otay Line of Cases. There has been quite a splash of jurisprudence lately on the question of when a prevailing party can be adjudged in mixed legal-arbitration proceedings. The next case is the latest addition to the case law on this subject. In Turner v. Schultz, Case Nos.
Fourth District, Division 1 Finds No Basis To Assess Fees Against Nonsignatory Individual Principal In the Absence of an Alter Ego Finding. In New Century Corporation v. Positive Investments, Inc., Case No. ECU03797 (4th Dist., Div. 1 July 8, 2009) (unpublished), lender was awarded attorney’s fees of $83,329 under an attorney’s fees clause of
Fourth District, Division 2 Rebuffs Request for Over $40,000 in Fees. Plaintiff landlord sued and ultimately recovered $37,420 in delinquent rent (plus $10,295.96 in interest) from former tenants who had abandoned commercial premises being rented in the past. Landlord won a prior judicial arbitration, being awarded $13,622 in fees and costs. However, when landlord
Sixth District Applies Reasoning of Santisas. The next case shows how appellate courts apply a pragmatic standard in gauging whether a party prevailed in order to recover attorney’s fees, even after a voluntarily dismissal of a fraud count where fees might be recoverable under an expansive Purchase Agreement clause. Almog v. Mueller,
Fourth District, Division 3 Remands for Fee Redetermination in “Acrid Dispute Between Neighbors.” Disputes between homeowner associations and members or neighbors in a common interest subdivision seem to result in overboilings of emotions and (ultimately) litigation resources. Many times, the final result—where both sides seek to recoup hefty attorney’s fees—results in a “wash,” with
Fourth District, Division 1 “Multitasks” in Covering a Wide Gamut of Fee Issues in Recent Unpublished Opinion. Here is a review of a complex and wild decision covering a myriad of remedy and fees issues in the context of City of Novato’s dispute with a developer and its successor over performance of two separate
Fourth District, Division 3 Finds No Fees Were Expended Even Though Nonsuit Grant Could Give Rise to Fee Exposure Under Different Circumstances. In an unusual procedural context, the Fourth District, Division 3 reversed an award of $73,026.79 in Civil Code section 1717 fees to defendants after the plaintiff neighbors lost nuisance and trespass claims
