Fourth District, Division 3 Emphatically Makes the Point.
Roden v. Amerisourcebergen Corp., Case No. G041990 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 8, 2010) (certified for publication) involved a plaintiff who was disappointed in being denied an award of attorney’s fees under a supplemental executive retirement plan (with ERISA implications) after prevailing on some aspects of litigation against defendant. Even though he had some successes and some failures, his plight got worse on appeal, with the appellate court reversing a change of control decision in his favor. The trial court found that both sides got some of what they want, so no one prevailed. That is also how the appellate court saw it, in a 3-0 opinion by Justice Moore—with the result not being different under the ERISA fee-shifting provision that is discretionary in nature. (See 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1).)