Galan v. Wolfriver Holding Corp., 80 Cal. App. 4th 1124 (2000)

Citation: Galan v. Wolfriver Holding Corp., 80 Cal. App. 4th 1124 (2000)
Parent Document: Galan v. Wolfriver Holding Corp., 80 Cal. App. 4th 1124 (2000)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2000-05-22
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5808516/galan-v-wolfriver-holding-corp/ ↗

Full Text

1,321 chars

The matter was heard on December 9, 1998. The trial court awarded costs to Wolfriver in the sum of $674 but denied its request for attorney fees. The *1127trial court set forth its reasons in a tentative decision, which it adopted as its final ruling. In denying attorney fees, the trial court explained: “1. It appears from the case law that the Court has discretion to determine which party prevailed ‘at a practical level.’ [ft] Wolfriver has not established that it has prevailed. It has not established that the building it purchased did not have the problems which plaintiffs have alleged, nor has it established that all or some of those problems were caused by tenant sabotage, [ft] Instead, it appears that plaintiffs made a satisfactory settlement with the other defendants, which included as a condition that plaintiffs dismiss Wolfriver. [ft] Further, having settled, plaintiffs made a practical determination that it was not worth pursuing Wolfriver through what would have been a costly trial, [ft] Thus, at the practical level the court concludes that there is no prevailing party. The merits of the dispute against Wolfriver were never resolved. Instead, it appears that Wolfriver ‘waited the plaintiffs out,’ betting that the plaintiffs, having settled with the other defendants, would let Wolfriver go.”

Other Sections in This Document (26)

Full Text