legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Savage v. Savage CA1/1
This is an appeal and cross-appeal from an order denying cross-motions for contractual attorney fees and denying a motion to tax costs. The probate court ruled “there was no prevailing party in this action” and denied both motions for fees and denied appellant Colette Savage’s motion to tax. We affirm, but not for the reasons identified by the probate court, which included that it did not set aside the two promissory notes at issue on any of the grounds asserted by Colette, and that defendant Mark Savage could have avoided nearly all fees had he made a competent evidentiary showing at the outset of the proceeding that the two notes in dispute “had in fact been cancelled.”

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale