Heritage Engineering Construction, Inc. v. City of Industry

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 703·65 Cal. App. 4th 1435·77 Cal. Rptr. 2d 459·98 Daily Journal DAR 8691·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6300
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 11, 1998B108797, B118837California2,271 words

Opinion

Opinion

Grignon, J.

Plaintiff Heritage Engineering Construction, Inc., appeals from the judgment and postjudgment orders denying it costs and awarding costs to defendants City of Industry and Industry Urban Development Agency (collectively the City). The City appeals from the postjudgment orders denying it attorney’s fees and awarding attorney’s fees to Heritage. In the published portion of this opinion, we conclude the 1997 amendment to Code of Civil Procedure section 998, which became effective while this appeal was pending, is applicable to this case. We conclude further that Heritage obtained a more favorable judgment within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure section 998 as amended, than the City’s pretrial settlement offer. In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we resolve Heritage’s attack on the underlying judgment. We reverse the cost award in favor of the City and remand for a determination of costs to be awarded Heritage as the prevailing party. In all other respects, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural Background

Heritage was hired by the City to widen a City street. The construction contract provided that, in the event suit was brought, the prevailing party would be…

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.