Prevailing Party: Past Minor Reversal On Repayment Issue Did Not Change The Conclusion That Prior Prevailing Party Still Prevailed For Purposes Of An Attorney’s Fees Award

Minor Reversal And Remand Did Not Disturb Prior Fee Result.

            We have to say that we love the language of Justice Bedsworth from our local 4/3 DCA, especially in this case which has gone up and down in the trial and appellate courts, namely, Voit v. Malliet, Case Nos. G058435 et al. (4^th Dist., Div. 3 June 15, 2021) (unpublished).

            What happened in this one was that the appellate court, in a prior appeal, remanded on specific instructions to look at a repayment issue but determining quite clearly that one side was the prevailing party.  On remand, the lower court determined no repayments were made but modified one aspect of an unjust enrichment claim (but awarding no damages on it).  Appellant argued that he was the prevailing party based on the modified judgment.  Naught, said the 4/3 DCA, indicating that some of the arguments for this were based on “tunnel vision” and were “binary” in nature.  The minor part of the modified judgment in no way changed the earlier prevailing party determination; in fact, a different conclusion would have been a lower court abuse of discretion.

            BLOG COMMENT—This case has nice citations, to the benefit of litigators, for the proposition that unjust enrichment is not a cause of action.