Sears v. Baccaglio
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
*1139Opinion
This opinion considers a question which routinely troubles trial courts attempting to identify the “prevailing party” for the purpose of awarding attorney’s fees resulting from litigation of contracts. Periodic legislative modification of the “American” rule provided by Code of Civil Procedure section 1021, which generally requires litigants to pay their own attorney fees, has created uncertainty over the extent of trial court discretion to award fees. This has been particularly apparent in cases where there are multiple issues and parties, where there is recovery of extrajudicial or…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Chia-Lee Hsu v. AbbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Trope v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Burden v. SnowdenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Kimmel v. GolandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- Gray v. Don Miller & Associates, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- PLCM Group, Inc. v. DrexlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- Goodman v. LozanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- Blickman Turkus v. Mf Downtown SunnyvaleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. DintinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Berkla v. Corel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.