Galan
Galan v. Wolfriver Holding Corp.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Klein, J.
Defendant and appellant Wolfriver Holding Corporation (Wolfriver) appeals an order denying its motion for attorney fees after plaintiffs and respondents Antonio Cruz Galan et al. (collectively, Galan) voluntarily dismissed their action against Wolfriver.
The essential issue presented is whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding Wolfriver was not the prevailing party for purposes of *1126 recovery of attorney fees. We conclude plaintiffs’ voluntary dismissal of their action against Wolfriver did not confer prevailing party status upon Wolfriver for purposes of recovering attorney fees pursuant to Civil Code section 1942.4.
On this record, the trial court acted within its discretion in finding Wolfriver was not the prevailing party. Therefore, the order is affirmed.
Factual and Procedural Background
This matter arose from a slum housing case against Daniel Lee related to his ownership and operation of substandard buildings in the downtown Los Angeles area. After Lee defaulted on his building at 916 Georgia Street (the building), the bank that financed the building, Far East National Bank (Far East), acquired it in December 1993. Far East thus was named…