Haun

Haun v. Pagano

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 18, 2026D084385California4,953 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 2/18/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THEODORE HAUN, as Trustee, etc., D084385

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2020- 00018288-PR-TR-CTL) KELLY PAGANO et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Kevin A. Enright, Judge. Affirmed. Law Offices of John Murphy, III, John Murphy; Williams Iagmin, Jon R. Williams, and Thomas E. Robertson for Defendants and Appellants. Higgs Fletcher & Mack, John Morris, and Steven M. Brunolli for Plaintiff and Respondent.

The question presented in this appeal is whether an award of attorney’s fees under a unilateral fee-shifting provision, Welfare and Institutions Code

section 15657.5, subdivision (a)1, for a successful financial elder abuse claim

Subsequent undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. was improper because the petitioner in the probate case was also the cross- respondent in an unsuccessful competing claim for elder abuse. Relying primarily on this court’s decision in Carver v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.