Acquiescence Was A Key Predicate For Appeal Affirmance.
In Fidelity National Title Co. v. Mehta, Case No. B309988 (2d Dist., Div. 1 June 27, 2023) (unpublished), an arbitrator awarded about $440,000 in compensatory damages which were affirmed on appeal (even after reversal of a trial court deletion of consequential damages) and also awarded $167,315.94 in attorney’s fees to the prevailing party where an arbitration fees clause allowed fee recovery for a motion to compel arbitration result but did not preclude recovery of fees for other work. The losing party was unsuccessful in challenging the fee award on appeal for two reasons: 1) the contractual fees clause did not prohibit recovery of fees for work other than a motion to compel arbitration; and (2) the parties requested fees from the arbitrator such that they acquiesced to submission of the issue at the arbitral stage (J.C. Gury Co. v. Nippon Carbide Industries (USA) Inc., 152 Cal.App.4th 1300, 1303-1305 (2007)).
Comments