City of Patterson v. Patterson Hotel Associates CA
Defendants, cross-complainants and appellants Patterson Hotel Associates, LLC (“PHA”) and Dominic Speno seek review of the trial court’s order awarding attorney’s fees to plaintiff, cross-defendant and respondent, the City of Patterson.
Briefly stated, the City prevailed on its complaint against PHA and Speno, as well as on all claims alleged in Speno’s cross-complaint against the City. The trial court awarded the City attorney’s fees for work performed on the cross-complaint pursuant to contract and Civil Code section 1717, without apportioning fees between Speno’s contractual and non-contractual claims. On appeal, Speno contends the court erred in awarding any fees because all the claims alleged in the cross-complaint are related by inextricable overlap to his inverse condemnation claim, which is subject to a unilateral fee-shifting provision favoring only prevailing plaintiffs. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1036.) According to Speno, this unilateral fee-shifting provisio
Comments on City of Patterson v. Patterson Hotel Associates CA