Denial Of $16,060 Sanctions Fee Request Was No Error Because It Was An Interim Ruling Not Impacting The Litigant’s Eventual Prevailing Party Status.
In Aquino v. Klein, Case No. B301186 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 8, 2021) (unpublished), a dispute between friends, who went into business and then had a falling out romantically, resulted in a close to decades in litigation by which one party prevailed against a trustee to the tune of $422,669.93. The prevailing party then moved for an initial recovery of $458,007.63 in fees, later reduced to $386,355.02 after the trial court asked for justification. (BLOG HINT: Always bad when you backpedal around $35,000 in a fee request, given that fees motions are always about credibility.) Ultimately, the lower court only awarded $192,000.50 in fees, about 50% of the reduced request. Prevailing party appealed this as well as the denial of an interim order denying sanctions and a $16,060 sanctions request.
The 2/3 DCA affirmed. The interim sanctions award was not reviewed because it was intermediate and the prevailing party obtained relief later, such that it was not reviewable under Code of Civil Procedure section 906. With respect to the $192,000.50 appeal in which the prevailing party argued the fee award was not enough, appellant could not hurdle the abuse of discretion standard, especially given that the lower court scrutinized things and wanted further justification. Appellant argued that a more specific basis for the fee award was warranted, but only cited federal civil rights cases which did not govern the law with respect to private parties (where no statement of decision is required, generally, under state law).
Judge Salter, an Orange County Superior Court Judge, sitting by assignment, authored the 3-0 decision.
Comments