Filed 9/28/18 Schwindt v. Omar CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| CHRISTINA SCHWINDT,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
RUHKSANA OMAR et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
|
G055020
(Super. Ct. No. 30-2015-00774201)
O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Richard W. Luesebrink, Judge. (Retired judge of the Orange Super.Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice, pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal.Const.) Reversed and remanded with directions.
Stuart Kane LLP, Donald J. Hamman and Eve A. Brackmann for Defendants and Appellants.
Bohm Wildish & Matsen, LLP, Daniel R. Wildish and Charles H. Smith, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
This is an appeal from a trial court’s judgment concerning an order of attorney fees following a bench trial. The underlying facts and procedural background are more fully described in a companion opinion being filed today (G054373).
We reverse the attorney fee award and remand the matter with directions consistent with the companion opinion.
I
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On March 27, 2017, following a bench trial, the trial court awarded plaintiff and respondent Christina Schwindt $246,685.75 in attorney fees as the prevailing party in the underlying action.
Defendants and appellants Ruhksana and Akbar Omar are appealing from the attorney fee award.
II
DISCUSSION
Generally, “each party to a lawsuit ordinarily pays its own attorney fees.” (Mountain Air Enterprises, LLC v. Sundowner Towers, LLC (2017) 3 Cal.5th 744, 751.) However, an award of attorney fees can be provided for by contract: “In any action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides that attorney’s fees . . . shall be awarded . . . then the party who is determined to be the party prevailing on the contract . . . shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees . . . .” (Civ. Code, § 1717, subd. (a).)
Here, the trial court awarded Schwindt $246,685.75 in attorney fees as the prevailing party in the underlying action. The Omars do not contest the propriety of the attorney award or the amount of the award. The Omars argue that if they are successful in the companion appeal (G054373), then Schwindt would no longer be the prevailing party and she would therefore not entitled to an attorney fee award. Schwindt appears to concede the argument.
In the companion opinion we reversed the underlying judgment. The court was ordered to further explain its ruling in its statement of decision. The court may either reinstate or alter its earlier judgment. Thus, the attorney fee award is also reversed.
III
DISPOSITION
The attorney fee award is reversed. The matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion and the companion opinion (G054373). In the interests of justice, each party shall bear their own costs on appeal.
MOORE, J.
WE CONCUR:
BEDSWORTH, ACTING P. J.
GOETHALS, J.
