Eickhoff v. Fuld
Filed 5/17/06 Eickhoff v. Fuld CA2/7
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 SEVEN
PHILIP EICKHOFF, Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant, v. JULIE FULD, Individually and as Trustee, etc., et al., Defendants, Cross-complainants and Respondents. | B183971 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LC067816) |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, Stanley M. Weisberg, Judge. Affirmed.
Wagner Lautsch, Megan L. Wagner and John C. Lautsch, for Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant.
Valensi, Rose, Magaram, Morris & Murphy and Stephen F. Moeller for Defendants, Cross-complainants and Respondents.
_____________________
Philip Eickhoff appeals from a postjudgment order denying his motion for attorney fees after he prevailed on both his declaratory-relief complaint against the Steven and Julie Fuld Living Trust and Julie Fuld (the Fuld parties) and the Fuld parties' cross-complaint. The trial court concluded there was no contractual authorization for an attorney-fee award in this case. We agree and affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In August 2000 Eickhoff entered into a written independent-contractor agreement with Steven Fuld, owner and principal officer of Steven Fuld Insurance Services, Inc., doing business as The Skyline Group (Skyline), providing Eickhoff would continue to work with Skyline to promote and sell its products. The purpose of the agreement is set forth in paragraph 2: â€
