Nicastro

CAROLE RING & ASSOCIATES v. Nicastro

Bad Law
104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 519·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 124·2001 Daily Journal DAR 2029·87 Cal. App. 4th 253·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1642
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 2001B135439California2,930 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klein, J.

Defendant and appellant Mario A. Nicastro (Nicastro) appeals an order denying attorney fees and costs after Nicastro prevailed in an arbitration brought by plaintiff and respondent Carole Ring & Associates (Ring). Nicastro seeks attorney fees and costs he incurred at the arbitration level as well as attorney fees and costs incurred in postarbitration judicial proceedings.

The issue is whether a contract providing for arbitration and authorizing attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party may be relied on to support postarbitration attorney fees and costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1293.2, even though the arbitrator directed the parties to bear their own attorney fees and costs.

Here, Nicastro is bound by the judgment confirming the arbitration award, including the arbitrator’s refusal to award attorney fees and costs incurred during the arbitration proceeding. However, the arbitrator’s decision does not prevent Nicastro’s entitlement under the contract to recover attorney fees and costs incurred in postarbitration judicial proceedings, although that result may seem somewhat anomalous. Therefore, the order is affirmed in part and reversed in…

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.