Reason Was That Matter Should Have Been Brought As Limited Civil Case Rather Than An Unlimited One.
Code of Civil Procedure section 1033 grants a trial court discretion to deny, in whole or in part, a plaintiff’s recovery of litigation costs, including attorney’s fees, where the plaintiff brought the action as an unlimited civil case but obtains a judgment for money damages in an amount that could have been recovered in a limited civil case.
In U.S. Construction Law v. Kinder, Case No. D074911 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 12, 2020) (unpublished), plaintiff law firm sued to recover over $68,000 in fees from ex-client for representing her in a cabin repair case alleging $75,000 in damages, a case where the causes of action which could have given ex-client fee recovery, if successful, were ejected through a summary judgment motion—which prompted law firm to withdraw. Ex-client cross-complained for breach of fiduciary duty and negligence in the handling of the action from which law firm sought to collect the $68,000-plus in fees. The jury only awarded law firm $7,580 in damages out of the requested $68,000-plus. Law firm then sought attorney’s fees as the prevailing party under a contractual fees clause in the retainer agreement. The trial judge denied the request in entirety based on the view that the cabin repair suit should not have been brought in the first place (but certainly not as an unlimited case) and the fees sought for the work were unreasonable.
The 4/1 DCA affirmed, finding the fee/costs denial to be no abuse of discretion. The cabin repair suit was not well-founded, and the law firm did not show good judgment in filing it as an unlimited case. Although the trial court even expressed that a denial is an unusual ruling, that ruling was justified under the circumstances.
Comments