No Prevailing Party Determination Was No Abuse Of Discretion.
“Mixed results” is a real challenge for a litigant seeking fees under a contractual fees clause or a statutory fee-shifting basis, such as the Davis-Stirling Act. The lower court in Drohan v. Newcombe, Case Nos. C097894 et al. (3d Dist. July 18, 2025) (unpublished) decided that there was no prevailing party, based on mixed results, a determination affirmed on appeal.
The litigants were neighbors in a Truckee planned development, involving nice canyon views but subject to residential construction height restrictions. At the end of the day, one side obtained $237,000 in damages for fraud claims, but the other side defeated CC&R breach/nuisance claims. Both sides moved for fees—one side moved for $293,210, while the other side moved for about $60,000. The lower court determined that there were “mixed results,” determining no one was a prevailing party entitled to fees.
The Third District affirmed. Although one side did get a fraud judgment, the other side fended off a construction injunctive relief battle and defensed CC&R claims. One side claimed that it won based on a routine cost statute, but that ignored law that fee-shifting determinations are pragmatically based rather than categorical in nature. Given the mixed results, the lower court was within its right to award no fees to anyone—no side prevailed.