Moses

DISCUSSION

Moses argues that the trial court erred by awarding attorney fees to defendants and denying his fee request. Specifically, Moses asserts that the trial court misinterpreted the attorney fee clause in the MOU and misapplied section 1717. For the reasons discussed herein, we agree and reverse.

I. Standard of review

An appellate court ordinarily reviews an award of attorney fees after trial for abuse of discretion. (Mountain Air Enterprises, LLC v. Sundowner Towers, LLC (2017) 3 Cal.5th 744, 751 (Mountain Air).) However, where, as here, the appeal challenges the legal basis for the trial court ruling by challenging its interpretation of a contract and the application of law to undisputed facts, our review is de novo. (Ibid.)

II. The attorney fee provision in the MOU encompasses

noncontractual claims arising from any dispute “regarding” the MOU A. Legal principles “Except as attorney’s fees are specifically provided for by statute, the measure and mode of compensation of attorneys and counselors at law is left to the agreement, express or implied, of the parties . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1021.) “If a contractual attorney fee provision is phrased broadly…