Construction: Plaintiff Awarded Quantum Meruit Recovery, But Suffering Defeat On 5 Out of 6 Other Claims, Was Not A Prevailing Party

Fee Denial Affirmed by Fourth District, Division 2.

     Cannan Construction v. Majewski, Case No. E048784 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Dec. 16, 2010) (unpublished) demonstrates that the trial court has substantial discretion in determining who is a “prevailing party” under fee shifting statutes.

     In this one, plaintiff won quantum meruit recovery from defendant, but also suffered some defeats--a directed verdict on 5 of 6 claims and an indemnification declaratory relief claim relating to unlicensed contractor disgorgements.

     Plaintiff cross-appealed from a trial court’s refusal to award it attorney’s fees. The appellate court agreed with the fee denial ruling. The reason was simple: the jury found there were no contracts between the parties (which gutted a Civil Code section 1717 fee claim), and plaintiff was not the “prevailing party” given the mixed results notwithstanding the quantum meruit recovery gained by plaintiff.