Prevailing Party Obtained No Fees For Property Rescission Work, But Did Obtain Partial Fees For Compensatory Damages/Offset Phase Of The Case.
This case, Nosrati v. Gonzalez, Case No. B317588 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Jan. 13, 2023) (unpublished) shows how a trial judge can award a prevailing party in some phases of the litigation “prevailing party” fees even though that party did not prevail in an earlier phase.
Residential buyers sued sellers for failure to disclose defects in a home they sold to buyers. Shortly before trial, sellers accepted buyers’ demand for rescission, and buyers won compensatory damages, minus offsets, and prejudgment interest against seller. Buyers moved for attorney’s fees based on a purchase agreement contractual clause to the tune of $260,412.87. The lower court awarded them only $88,297.26, with sellers appealing on the basis that buyers should not have been declared the prevailing parties.
The 2/7 DCA affirmed. Based on admissions in a legal malpractice action, the lower court properly credited that buyers did not want rescission such that they should not obtain fees for this relief which totaled $178,619. However, buyers did prevail in the compensatory damages phase, with nothing in the law not allowing the lower court to award reasonable attorney’s fees for prevailing in the second phase of the litigation. The phased-nature of the case did not prevent “prevailing party” fees in the phase where buyers did accomplish their litigation objectives.
Comments