Silver

Silver v. Boatwright Home Inspection, Inc.

Good Law
118 Cal. Rptr. 2d 475·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 3649·2002 Daily Journal DAR 3627·97 Cal. App. 4th 443·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2984
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 4, 2002No. B146581California3,651 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Croskey, J.

Defendant Boatwright Home Inspection, Inc. (Boatwright) appeals from an order that denied the motion for attorney’s *446 fees it filed after a pretrial judgment of voluntary dismissal was entered in its favor. Boatwright contends it is the prevailing party as between itself and the plaintiffs who filed the dismissal, and therefore the trial court abused its discretion when it denied Boatwright such fees. The plaintiffs, Tracy J. Silver and Maria Rodriguez (plaintiffs), assert that the various factors considered by the trial court when it ruled on Boatwright’s motion led the court to properly decide that Boatwright should not recover its attorney’s fees.

We have examined the procedural posture of this case and the applicable law, and we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Boatwright’s motion for fees. Plaintiffs obtained their litigation objective, recovery of damages, through settlements with defendants other than Boatwright. We hold that under Santisas v. Goodin (1998) 17 Cal.4th 599 [ 71 Cal.Rptr.2d 830 , 951 P.2d 399 ], this recovery of damages, even though it was not from Boatwright, will support the trial court’s determination that…

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.