Defense SLAPP Fees, Although SLAPP Grant Was Reversed, Were A Proper Element In The End, Because Litigation Sometimes Involves Unsuccessful Efforts—Giving Trial Judges Discretion On Whether to Award Fees For Those Efforts.
In Mondragon v. Bergmann, Case No. B335486 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 30, 2025) (unpublished), plaintiff suing a homeowner’s association and related defendants did win an anti-SLAPP grant and adverse fee order, but later voluntarily dismissed her suit without obtaining a settlement or any judgment. HOA then requested $81,083 in attorney’s fees under the Davis-Stirling Act’s fee shifting provision (which also included the anti-SLAPP fees reversed in the prior appeal). The lower court determined the HOA side achieved their litigation objective in obtaining a dismissal of the suit, awarding the full amount requested.
The 2/3 DCA affirmed the fee award against the plaintiff. The HOA side did obtain their litigation objectives such that it affords the lower court discretion to determine that it prevailed notwithstanding the voluntary dismissal, citing Santisas, Saleh, and Haidet. With respect to the anti-SLAPP fees also being included, that ruling was no abuse of discretion, because litigation sometimes involves unsuccessful work such that the lower court has discretion to determine if it should be awarded or not—with the appellate court citing City of Sacramento v. Drew and Simers for this proposition.
Comments