Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 21STLC02544, Date: 2023-01-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STLC02544    Hearing Date: January 26, 2023    Dept: 26

Grazziani v. Permit My Property, et al.

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES

(CCP §§ 1032, 1033.5; Civil Code § 1717)


TENTATIVE RULING:

 

Plaintiff Adalgisa Grazziani’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is DENIED.

 

 

ANALYSIS:

           

Plaintiff Adalgisa Grazziani (“Plaintiff”) brought this action for breach of contract against Defendant Permit My Property, LLC (“Defendant”) on March 30, 2021. The matter came for trial on September 27, 2022, after which judgment was entered in Plaintiff’s favor in the amount of $16,751.00 principal and $6,700.00 interest. (Minute Order, 09/27/22.)

 

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Attorney’s Fees on October 3, 2022. To date, no opposition has been filed.

 

Discussion

 

A prevailing party in entitled to recover costs, including attorneys’ fees when authorized by contract. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (a)(4); § 1033.5, subd. (a)(10)(A).) Similarly, Code of Civil Procedure section 1717 provides that attorneys’ fees and costs shall be awarded to the prevailing party in an action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides for attorney’s fees and costs. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1717, subd. (a).)

 

A motion for attorney’s fees must be filed and served with the time for filing a notice of appeal under Cal. Rules of Court Rule 8.822. (Cal. Rules of Court Rule 3.1702(a).) Cal. Rules of Court Rule 8.822 states that a notice of appeal must be filed within either (1) 30 days after the trial court clerk served the party filing the motion with notice of entry of judgment; (2) 30 days after the party filing the notice of appeal serves or is served by a party with a document entitled “Notice of Entry” of judgment; or (3) 90 days after entry of judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court 8.822(1).) Here, judgment was entered on September 27, 2022 and the instant motion was timely filed on October 3, 2022.

 

It is undisputed that Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action, as the party in whose favor the judgment was entered. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (a)(4).) Accordingly, it is entitled to recover its costs under Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, subdivision (a). It is also entitled to recovery its attorney’s fees if such recovery is provided for in the contract at issue, as Plaintiff argues.

 

However, the parties’ contract only provides for recovery of attorney’s fees by the prevailing party following arbitration. The attorney’s fees are specifically provided for in the arbitration provision, as follows:

 

BINDING ARBITRATION / LEGAL DISPUTES: The two parties to this Agreement, the Client and PMP, agree that all claims, disputes, and other matters in question between parties to this Contract, arising out of or relating to the work of this Contract or the breach thereof, or relating to any of the work or relationships referred to in this Contract, shall be decided by binding arbitration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association; unless the parties mutually agree in writing otherwise. . . . In the event of any Arbitration dispute between the parties arising out of or in connection with this Agreement or PMP's performance of Services, the prevailing party shall be entitled to cover its costs incurred in connection with the non-prevailing party, including reasonable attorney fees; to the extent awarded. In the event any of the parties to this Contract shall seek to resolve any matter through arbitration as set forth herein, the arbitration shall be conducted in Los Angeles County, California.

 

(Motion, Staree Decl., Exh. A,” ¶X.) Plaintiff does not explain how the provision for attorney’s fees under the arbitration agreement can be read to find that the parties agreed to an award of attorney’s fees following litigation. (See Motion, p, 5:3-14.) In fact, the more reasonable interpretation is that attorney’s fees were only included in the arbitration provision as an incentive to arbitrate. The plain language of the contract, therefore, does not provide for an award of attorney’s fees to the party that prevails in litigation.

 

Conclusion

 

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff Adalgisa Grazziani’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is DENIED.

 

 

Court clerk to give notice.