de la Cuesta v. Benham
193 Cal. App. 4th 1287
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Landlord sued for unlawful detainer and unpaid rent; tenant claimed deductions due to leaks and urged lease forfeiture.
- Tenant vacated the premises the day before trial, so trial proceeded only on monetary claims.
- Trial court awarded about $69,500 to landlord after adjusting for leaks and CAM charges; also deducting some amounts.
- Postjudgment, court denied landlord's request for attorney fees, finding no prevailing party under Civil Code §1717.
- Appellate court held entitlement and discretion must be reconciled; case tested whether lopsided results can still yield prevailing party status.
- Supreme Court reversed, remanding to declare landlord the prevailing party and determine reasonable fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was a prevailing party under §1717 given the lopsided relief | Landlord obtained greater relief overall | Tenant contend no party prevailed due to partial losses | Landlord prevailed; court abused discretion by denying fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Hsu v. Abbara, 9 Cal.4th 863 (Cal. 1995) (established framework for determining prevailing party)
- Scott Co. v. Blount, Inc., 20 Cal.4th 1103 (Cal. 1999) (complete victory required for entitlement; mixed results discretionary)
- Nasser v. Superior Court, 156 Cal.App.3d 52 (Cal. App. 1984) (mixed result case; scrutinized prevailing party outcome)
- Kytasty v. Godwin, 102 Cal.App.3d 762 (Cal. App. 1980) (good news/bad news doctrine for prevailing party)
- Hilltop Investment Associates v. Leon, 28 Cal.App.4th 462 (Cal. App. 1994) (limits on discretion in §1717 determinations)
- Ajaxo Inc. v. E*Trade Group Inc., 135 Cal.App.4th 21 (Cal. App. 2005) (complete victory not always required; contract claim success weighed)
- Silver Creek, LLC v. BlackRock Realty Advisors, Inc., 173 Cal.App.4th 1533 (Cal. App. 2009) (rejected purely numerical 'counting claims' approach; weighed overall relief)
- Deane Gardenhome Assn. v. Denktas, 13 Cal.App.4th 1394 (Cal. App. 1993) (illustrated limits of unfettered discretion in fee rulings)