Fee Award Challenge Could Not Be Considered Based On Failure To Appeal Amended Judgment Awarding Fees.
In Blecher Collins et al. v. Mireskandari, Case No. B263619 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Oct. 27, 2016) (unpublished), the Blecher Collins law firm sued and prevailed in a lawsuit for nonpayment by two suspended former English solicitors which the firm represented in some U.S. lawsuits. The firm won $355,822.08 and prevailed on malpractice/breach of fiduciary duty cross-claims by the former solicitors, determinations affirmed on appeal. The lower court also awarded the law firm $90,165 based on a retainer fees clause.
Solicitors said “wait a minute, law firm, you represented yourself so no Civil Code section 1717 fee recovery can be had under Trope v. Katz [one of our Leading Cases].” The appellate court determined it could not reach this issue because solicitors failed to appeal the amended judgment awarding fees to the law firm. Here is how it reasoned that there was a lack of jurisdiction to entertain the challenge: “With respect to attorney’s fees, the original February 24, 2015 judgment provided: ‘Pursuant to Civil Code § 1717, [the Blecher firm] is entitled to recover its attorney’s fees as provided in the contract between the parties.’ Although the language on its face is somewhat ambiguous as to whether the Blecher firm’s entitlement to attorney’s fees had been adjudicated, it is clear from the record it had not been. The Blecher firm had yet to request such fees. More to the point, the current controversy on appeal regarding the Blecher firm’s right to obtain fees incurred by its own attorneys had yet to be litigated. In this context, the language in the judgment indicates the Blecher firm’s eligibility to seek whatever fees might be available under the retainer agreement pursuant to Civil Code section 1717 rather than the firm’s entitlement to fees following adjudication of the pertinent issues, with only the amount to be inserted later. [¶] Because the former solicitors did not file a notice of appeal from the amended judgment finding that the Blecher firm was entitled to fees and fixing the amount of those fees, their challenge to the attorney’s fees award is beyond our jurisdictional reach.” (Slip Opn., p. 23.)
Comments