Schurgin

Introduction

This appeal follows a court trial. The only issue raised is the propriety of the court’s discretionary order that each side bear its own costs even though it had determined defendants to be the prevailing party. We find no abuse of discretion and therefore affirm the challenged order.

Factual and Procedural Background

In the underlying lawsuit, the central dispute was whether plaintiffs and defendants had entered into a partnership to develop and operate a shopping center.

Plaintiffs’ complaint alleged that they were 30 percent owners in the partnership. They asserted nine causes of action, all of which were derivative of the assertion that a partnership existed.

Defendants’ cross-complaint denied the existence of a partnership and sought declaratory relief on that issue. The pleading stated that were there no partnership “then [plaintiffs] are entitled to no recovery or relief against [defendants] other than such sum as represents the reasonable value of the services they actually performed, less any damages caused by [them as alleged in the cross-complaint].” The cross-complaint also alleged causes of action against plaintiffs for breach of contract…