Appellate Court Also Chastised Parties For Lack Of Record Citation In Appeals Briefing.
In Sardab v. Acme Bail Bonds Co., Case No. G050554 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 22, 2016) (unpublished), plaintiff was determined to be the prevailing party in a quiet title action after a judge’s ruling that she could void a husband’s property encumbrance as to her original 50% interest. Although some other claims were dismissed, both the trial and appellate courts sustained the view that plaintiff prevailed given that she prevailed on her main litigation objective and there was no sufficient record of what happened at trial to determine if the lower court erred in making its prevailing party determination. With respect to fees, however, plaintiff was neither a party nor a third party beneficiary of any contract so as to gain fee entitlement.
However, at the beginning of the opinion, Justice Thompson, for a 3-0 panel, reminded both sides that they had violated California Rules of Court by not providing adequate record citations in both their factual summaries and argumentative portions of appellate briefing. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(C).)