Legal Opinion

Sese v. Wells Fargo Bank

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 18, 2016No. C074663Published

1Opinion of the Court

Filed 7/22/16 pub. order 8/18/16 (see end of opn.) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ---- DANILO SESE, Plaintiff and Appellant, C074663 v. (Super. Ct. No. 34201300144287CUWEGDS) WELLS FARGO BANK N.A., Defendant and Respondent. Appellant Danilo Sese seeks to challenge an order denying his motion for interim attorney fees under Civil Code section 2924.12, a provision in the California Homeowner Bill of Rights.1 Subdivision (i) of section 2924.12 provides that “[a] court may award a prevailing borrower reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Morehart v. County of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Jennings v. MarralleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Lueras v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. Sullivan v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Doudell v. ShooCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API