However, Dealer Not Entitled To Fees For Administrative Proceedings/Related Writ Proceedings Associated With Administrative Level Battles.
Powerhouse Motorsports Group, Inc. v. Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A., Case No. B236705 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Nov. 26, 2013) (published) involved a retail motorcycle dealership obtaining a jury verdict award of over $1.3 million in compensatory/punitive damages against franchisor Yamaha for unreasonably withholding its consent to the the sale of the dealership and franchise in violation of California Vehicle Code section 11713.3. Based on a fee-shifting provision set forth in section 11726, the lower court awarded dealership $533,350 in attorney’s fees against Yamaha because dealership suffered pecuniary loss by a willful failure of Yamaha to comply with Vehicle Code provisions (specifically, section 11713.3). However, the same judge denied dealership’s request for an award of fees relating to certain administrative proceedings and related writ activities.
The judgment, inclusive of fee determinations, was affirmed on appeal.
Yamaha’s challenge to the fee award was to be reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. However, “willful failure” under the section 11726 fee-shifting provision encompassed intentional wrongful conduct, which was covered by the jury’s finding that Yamaha intended to disrupt dealership’s sale under section 11713.3.
Dealership’s cross-appeal challenge to the denial of fees for administrative proceedings was not erroneous because section 11726 only deals with willful failures, as relevant here, relating to administrative Board determinations. Given that Yamaha had sent a proper termination notice in line with technical requirements, the denial of fees for administrative works was justified.