Legal Opinion

Castro v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 11, 2004No. B169401PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CROSKEY, J.

In this case we must decide whether a party moving to expunge an improperly recorded lis pendens is entitled to attorney fees as a “prevailing party” under Code of Civil Procedure section 405.38 1 when the lis pendens is withdrawn before a ruling on the motion. We conclude that the withdrawal of a lis pendens while a motion to expunge is pending does not automatically preclude recovery of attorney fees to the moving party. Rather, we adopt a practical approach to determine the prevailing party based on the trial court’s determination of which party realized its objectives in…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Santisas v. GoodinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  2. Chia-Lee Hsu v. AbbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  3. International Industries, Inc. v. OlenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Carver v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2002
  5. Liberty Mutual Insurance v. FalesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Graciano v. Robinson Ford Sales, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
  2. Wohlgemuth v. Caterpillar Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2012
  3. Villa De Las Palmas Homeowners Ass'n v. TerifajCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Bock v. HansenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. Aleman v. Airtouch CellularCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012

26 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