CCP § 1008 Reconsideration Principles Did Not Govern; $95,182.75 Was The Fees/Costs Award.
In Westwood Village Condominium Assn. v. Allen, Case No. A169848 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Dec. 15, 2025) (unpublished), HOA sued homeowners over alleged CC&R noise, parking, and littering violations, with HOA determining at some point that defendants cured the violations. Based on the perception HOA achieved its litigation objectives, it reached a stipulation with homeowners to allow a Davis-Stirling Act fee motion to be filed to resolve the case even though there was no dismissal, settlement, or trial. A lower court denied the motion without prejudice based on it being premature, later transferring the case to a new judge. The fee motion was renewed, with the second judge granting it and awarding HOA $95,182.75 in fees/costs.
The 1/5 DCA affirmed. Homeowners argued that the renewed motion was an improper CCP § 1008 reconsideration motion. The appellate court disagreed, because a “without prejudice” denial allows for renewal without meeting section 1008 requirements. (Farber v. Bay View Terrace Homeowners Assn., 141 Cal.App.4th 1007, 1015 (2006); Nat. Grange of Order of Patrons of Husbandry v. Cal. Guild, 38 Cal.App.5th 706, 716 n. 10 (2019).)