Cases: Section 1717

Fee Clause Interpretation, Section 1717: Where Cross-Complaint Did Not Involve Any Enforcement Or Promise Breaches Of A Purchase Agreement With A Fees Clause, Attorney’s Fees Lacked Any Entitlement Basis

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Section 1717

Section 1717 Did Not Change The Analysis, Because The Scope Of The Fee Clause Can Only Relate To Contractual Claims—Meaning CCP § 1021 Must First Be Overcome.             Otay Land Co., LLC v. U.E. Limited LLC, Case No. D077274 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 20, 2021) (unpublished) reminds us that Civil Code section 1717 reciprocity […]

Section 1717: Simply Because A Fee Retention Was A Company Obligation, Does Not Mean It Might Not Be Recoverable

Cases: Section 1717

California Caselaw Dictated The Result.             Legendary Builders v. Grovewood Properties, Case Nos. B297299 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 5, 2021) (unpublished), although a convoluted opinion, stresses a lesson we have posted on under Civil Code section 1717—“incurred” is a term of art and can encompass pro bono, reduced efforts, and non-business compensation

Nonsignatories, Section 1717: Lenders, As Third-Party Beneficiaries, Properly Awarded Attorney’s Fees Under Broad Fee Clause Encompassing Tort Claims

Cases: Nonsignatories, Cases: Section 1717

$150,000 Was The Fee Award Affirmed In Lenders’ Favor As Prevailing Cross-Defendants.             Hom v. Petrou, Case No. A161770 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 3, 2021) (published) involved a $150,000 contractual attorney’s fees award in favor of lenders obtaining a dismissal of a cross-complaint alleging primarily tort claims.  The 1/4 DCA affirmed, holding that there

Probate, Section 1717: Section 1717 Prevailing Party Attorney Fees Of $84,402 Awarded To Plaintiff Pursuant To Trust’s No-Contest Clause Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Probate, Cases: Section 1717

No Basis For Fees Under No-Contest Clause Because Trust And Its Terms Were Not Contested, And Plaintiff Forfeited Argument For Fees Under Prob. Code § 17211(b) By Not Raising It Below.             In Haley v. Konatich, Case No. A160725 (1st Dist., Div. 2 June 29, 2021) (unpublished), three siblings were the beneficiaries of their late

Prevailing Party, Section 1717: 4/3 DCA Affirms $2 Million Section 1717 Fee Award To Plaintiff And $4.6 Million Section 1717 Fee Award To Defendant

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Two Separate Contracts Were At Issue – With Plaintiff Prevailing On The Asset Purchase Agreement And Defendant Prevailing On The Employment Contract.             In Colaco v. Cavotec SA, Case NO. G059418 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 24, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiffs corporation and its sole shareholder/CEO entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement and Plan of Reorganization

Sanctions, Section 1717, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: 2/7 DCA Reverses Sanctions Imposed Against Builder Defendants For Violation Of Stay Order Regarding A Development Project Of Four Homes In The Coastal Zone Of Venice.

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Stay Order Was Vague And Did Not Provide Builder With Information As To How It Was Supposed To Act Or What Conduct Would Violate The Stay.             In Rudisill v. California Coastal Commission, Case No. B299331 (2d Dist., Div. 7 June 22, 2021) (unpublished), two residents who opposed a development project consisting of four homes

Judgment Enforcement, Section 1717, Undertaking: Denial Of § 1717 Attorney Fees To Third Party Entities Defeating Postjudgment Alter Ego Claims Reversed, But Denial Of Release Of Undertaking To Successful Member/Partner Affirmed

Cases: Judgment Enforcement, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Undertaking

The Third District Followed The Reciprocity Principle Of § 1717 Set Forth In Reynolds Metals, MSY Trading, And 347 Group In Reversing The Fees Denial, But Affirmed Trial Court’s Denial Of Release Of Undertaking Based On Member/Partner’s Failure To Provide Notice.             In Westwood Homes, Inc. v. AGCPII Villa Salerno Member, LLC, Case No. C089127

Employment, Section 1717: Defendant Winning Independent Contractor Determination Against Real Estate Agent Under Labor Commissioner And De Novo Superior Court Action Was Entitled To $72,519.03 In Fees

Cases: Employment, Cases: Section 1717

Fees Were Justified Based On Broad Contractual Fees Clause.             In Peng v. F.M. Tarbell Co., Case No. B307484 (2d Dist., Div. 2 May 27, 2021) (unpublished), a plaintiff—a licensed real estate agent—lost a fight on whether he was an employee, versus an independent contractor, both at a Labor Commissioner and a superior court de

Allocation, Indemnity, Section 1717, Seriously: 4/1 DCA Affirms $6,000 Damages Award And $143,183.55 Out Of Requested $572,730.11 § 1717 Fees To Prevailing Breach Of Contract Plaintiff Who Proved $1,463,745 In Damages At Trial

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Indemnity, Cases: Section 1717, Seriously

Plaintiff’s Failure To Conduct Due Diligence Prior To Entering Into Commercial Lease And Failure To Mitigate Damages Once Problems Arose Left Him Upside-Down By More Than A Million Dollars When All Was Said And Done             Sherwood v. Vogele, Case No. D076776 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 7, 2021) (unpublished) highlights the importance of

Allocation, Multipliers, Section 1717, Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Reversal And Remand Were In Order Where Trial Court Believed It Did Not Have Authority To Apply A Negative Multiplier In An Award Of Attorney Fees

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

Invoices Submitted In Support Of Plaintiff’s § 1717 Fees Motion Were Extensively Redacted And Contained Vague Block-Billing, Which Offered The Trial Court No Way To Meaningfully Apportion Time Between Causes Of Action.             After defeating defendant’s cross-claim breach of contract cause of action, plaintiff moved for Civ. Code § 1717 attorney fees of $939,600.50, which

Scroll to Top