Hunsberger

Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Hunsberger

Good Law
163 Cal. App. 4th 1526·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 923·78 Cal. Rptr. 3d 661
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 18, 2008D050473California2,187 words

Opinion

Opinion

McINTYRE, J.

— In this case, defendant moved for an award of attorney fees as costs under Code of Civil Procedure section 998 after plaintiff dismissed its breach of guarantee action against him. (All undesignated statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.) Defendant argued that he was entitled to attorney fees because plaintiff failed to obtain a more favorable judgment than his earlier settlement offer. (§ 998, subd. (c)(1).) The trial court denied the request and defendant appealed from the order.

As we will explain, section 998 does not create an independent right to attorney fees and defendant’s only avenue for the recovery of attorney fees was subdivision (a) of Civil Code section 1717, which creates a bilateral right to attorney fees where, as here, a contract contains a unilateral attorney fee provision. However, this path to fees is blocked by subdivision (b)(2) of Civil Code section 1717, which bars any award of contractual attorney fees where an action has been voluntarily dismissed.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In September 2004, defendant D&S Mine, Inc. (D&S Mine), executed a written agreement to lease three trucks from Ford Motor Credit Company…

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.