Ayscough & Marar v. Morrison

Filed 8/8/06 Ayscough & Marar v. Morrison CA2/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,

Ramona G. See, Judge. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Raiskin & Revitz and Steven J. Revitz for Defendant and Appellant and for Defendants and Appellants.

Ayscough & Marar and Sidney Lanier, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Respondent Ayscough & Marar, a law firm, filed an interpleader action naming Timothy M. Morrison, his architecture and design company T.M. Morrison & Associates, Inc. (TMMA), as well as Mauro Santoyo Gomez as possible claimants. The proceeding was instituted to determine the ownership of an antique Japanese screen in respondent's care. Appellant Morrison challenges the trial court's order discharging respondent from liability. Appellants Morrison and TMMA challenge the award of attorney fees, arguing that specific property cannot support an award of fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 386.6.[1] We shall affirm the order of discharge. We conclude that attorney fees may be awarded when specific property is the subject of interpleader, but that the trial court erred in determining the amount of fees. We shall reverse and remand with respect to the fee order.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

Morrison was in possession of two Japanese screens, one of fans painted on gold leaf, the other of a warrior scene. Rick Jagerson, a TMMA employee, contacted Yasumi's Fine Arts Services to inquire about the cost of repairing the screens. Another TMMA employee, Chris Fernandez, delivered the two screens to Yasumi's to obtain an estimate.

Yasumi's determined that the warrior screen was a reproduction, but that the fan screen was authentic. Both screens were in poor condition. Yasumi's quoted a price of $4,000 to $4,500 to restore the fan screen, and $1,500 to $2,000 to restore the warrior screen.

The parties dispute the events that occurred next. Respondent's more detailed version follows. Someone named Alan from TMMA told Yasumi's that Morrison wanted the authentic screen restored but would pick up the reproduction. On June 16, 2003, Chris Fernandez or another company representative picked up the warrior screen. Yasumi's contacted TMMA several times, but did not receive a deposit to begin restoration efforts on the fan screen. On July 11, 2003, a person identifying himself as Chris called to arrange a pick up of the reproduction. Yasumi's told him that it had been picked up already.

Morrison filed a complaint on April 7, 2004, against â€