Another Individual Plaintiff Who Prevailed Properly Denied Fees Because He Brought No Fee Motion.
In Trapp v. Maham Group, Case No. E081888 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 17, 2025) (unpublished), individual plaintiff and a trust plaintiff affiliated with the individual won specific performance suits against defendants for breaching lease and purchase agreements giving plaintiffs a right of first refusal to buy the property being leased. The purchase agreement had an attorney’s fees clause with mediation condition precedent language, but with an exception for a suit filed to enable recordation of a lis pendens. The parties unsuccessfully went to a court-mediation after the suits were filed. Trust filed a fee motion as prevailing party for $116,961.25. The trial judge denied the fee request because he did not believe the court-ordered mediation was compliant with the condition precedent language in the fees clause.
The 4/2 DCA reversed the fee denial as to the trust. It found that trust had filed a lis pendens concurrently with its complaint, so the lis pendens exception did apply. (Blackburn v. Charnley, 117 Cal.App.4th 758, 768 (2000).) The matter was remanded to have the fee motion granted and have the trial judge determine the appropriate amount of fees to be awarded to trust.
Individual plaintiff claimed he was entitled to fees also, but his failure to file a motion to recover attorney’s fees was fatal to his argument on appeal.