Trial Court’s Denial of Fees Reversed Because Bank Was Prevailing Party.
Meeker v. Bank of America, N.A., Case No. B225289 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Feb. 26, 2012) (unpublished) illustrates that Civil Code section 1717’s mandate of awarding attorney’s fees to a prevailing party is indeed obligatory in nature, and that fee award denials–even if on equitable or “pocketbook” grounds–cannot stand if fee entitlement is existent.
Tenant bank won a summary judgment motion against landlord based on landlord not providing a notice to quit indicating that failure to pay business taxes was the ground for eviction. Rent was the eviction trigger alleged, and it did not hold up. However, the lower court denied bank’s motion to recoup attorney’s fees.
Reversed, because bank did achieve its primary litigation goal to remain in possession and landlord lost its bid to evict. That showed bank prevailed, pure and simple. (Mitchell Land & Improvement Co. v. Ristorante Ferrantelli, Inc., 158 Cal.App.4th 479, 485 (2007); Beverly Hills Properties v. Marcolino, 221 Cal.App.3d Supp. 7, 10-11 (1990).) Further, even a win on a technical ground will suffice to make one a prevailing party, meaning bank has another go at obtaining fee recovery.