Legal Opinion

Santisas v. Goodin

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 26, 1998No. S050326PublishedCited by 405 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KENNARD, J.

Many contracts include a provision requiring a contracting party to pay any attorney fees that the other party incurs to enforce the contract or in litigation arising from the contract. To ensure that these contractual attorney fee provisions do not operate in an unfairly one-sided manner, the Legislature enacted Civil Code section 1717, which states in part: “In any action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides that attorney’s fees and costs, which are incurred to enforce that contract, shall be awarded either to one of the parties or to the prevailing…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. AIU Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Reserve Insurance Co. v. PisciottaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Chia-Lee Hsu v. AbbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Reynolds Metals Co. v. AlpersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Trope v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by405 opinions

  1. PLCM Group, Inc. v. DrexlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Graham v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.California Supreme Court · 2005
  3. People v. MendozaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  4. People v. KnollerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Lewis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999

400 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