Legal Opinion
Lerner v. Ward
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 11, 1993No. B063705PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GILBERT, J.
A provision in an agreement allows for the recovery of attorney fees to the prevailing party in any action or proceeding arising out of the agreement. Here we hold that such a provision permits attorney fees to the prevailing party in a tort cause of action under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.
George and Jane Ward (the Wards) appeal from the trial court’s denial of their motion for attorney fees after the court entered judgment against respondents, Norman and Ina Lerner (the Lerners). We reverse.
Facts
The Lerners sued the Wards and others for falsely representing that…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Reynolds Metals Co. v. AlpersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Xuereb v. Marcus & Millichap, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1992
- International Industries, Inc. v. OlenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Stout v. TurneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Santisas v. GoodinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Trope v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Renwick v. Bennett (In re Bennett)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Sears v. BaccaglioCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Marsu, B v. Plaintiff-Counter Defendant v. The Walt Disney Company, Defendant-Counter ClaimantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.