Orien

Orien v. Lutz

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 5th 957·2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 962·224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 736·2017 WL 5022364
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 3, 2017B277323California4,695 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Flier, J.

*959 Defendants Mista L. Lutz and Russell A. Howells appeal from an order granting attorney fees to plaintiff Stara Orien, respondent here, after the trial court entered an interlocutory judgment of partition in her favor. The trial court found that an attorney fee provision in an earlier settlement agreement among the parties applied to the partition action, and thus awarded all fees to plaintiff under Civil Code section 1717 rather than apportioning the costs of partition under Code of Civil Procedure section 874.040. We hold that the partition action did not fall within the terms of the attorney fee provision. Accordingly, we reverse the order.

*960 BACKGROUND

In 2003 plaintiff and defendants received a gift of two residences from their mother. Each took an undivided one-third interest in the properties.

In 2006 the parties entered into a settlement agreement to resolve a probate claim regarding their mother's estate initiated by defendant Howells. Paragraph 11.1 of the settlement agreement, entitled " Sale of properties, " stated, "Mista, Stara and Russell [ (i.e., plaintiff and defendants) ] may sell the properties at any time they agree to do so. However, this provision…

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.