Dougherty

Filed 12/12/14; unmodified opn. attached

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

DAVID S. KARTON, A LAW B244231

CORPORATION,

(Los Angeles County Plaintiff, Appellant, and Super. Ct. No. BC206243) Respondent,

v.

WILLIAM RUSSELL DOUGHERTY,

Defendant, Appellant, and Respondent.

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on November 14, 2014, be modified in the following manner: On page 10, a footnote is inserted in the last paragraph of Part I of the Discussion, following the last sentence in that paragraph: “As a matter of law, Dougherty is the party prevailing on the contract within the meaning of section 1717.” The inserted footnote reads: At oral argument, Karton sought to portray its conduct on remand after our 2009 opinion as a defensive struggle against Dougherty’s alleged efforts to recover a substantial portion of the funds that Karton had collected through enforcement of the void judgment. We are not persuaded, because the record belies Karton’s claim to have acted merely defensively. First, Dougherty did not file a cross-complaint and…