Trespass: Absence Of Tangible Injury To Real Property Resulted In Reversal Of Fee Recovery Where Boundary Dispute Resulted In Nominal Damages To Vineyard

 

$117,000 Fee Recovery Under CCP § 1021.9 Went Away On Appeal.

     Belle Terre Ranch, Inc. v. Wilson, Case No. A137217 (1^st Dist., Div. 4 Jan. 13, 2015) (partially published; fee discussion published) involved the legal interpretation of Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.9, which mandates an award of fees to a prevailing party in a livestock/cultivation case “resulting” from a violation of a trespass. The precise question was whether a symbolic, $1 nominal damages award qualified as a compensatory recovery justifying fees under section 1021.9 (involving a winery and adjacent property owner in the Alexander Valley region). The vineyard won a boundary dispute below, garnering a $1 nominal compensatory award and a big $117,000 fees award under 1021.9.

     The appellate court reversed the fee award, determining that nominal damages, without proof of injury to real or personal property, could not support a 1021.9 fee award. In this one, the reviewing court determined that you need real tangible harm to real or personal property as a necessary predicate to a 1021.9 fee award.