Judge: Mark H. Epstein, Case: 20SMCV00596, Date: 2023-09-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20SMCV00596    Hearing Date: March 27, 2024    Dept: I

The motion is CONTINUED.  Defendant seeks $128,571.89 in fees (exclusive of sanctions previously awarded).  The theory is that under the pertinent CC&Rs, they are entitled to fees because they are prevailing parties in an action “to enforce or interpret, or otherwise related to or in connection with, the Governing Documents.”  (CC&R sec.11.6.)  State law also allows the prevailing party to recover fees in an action to enforce the association’s governing documents.  (Civ. Code sec. 5975.)  Much of Virk’s claim falls squarely within these provisions.  But it is not clear that the interference claim does.  In fact, the court’s general view is that the assertion that defendants interfered with Virk’s economic advantage seems to fall outside the scope.  The same seems to be true of the alleged interference with Virk’s contract with Sazegar.  In contrast, the cause of action for breach of contract is within the scope.

The court will continue the motion to allow defendants to withdraw any time related to those causes of action from the amount they seek.  Supplemental brief will be due in 10 court days and Virk will have 5 court days to respond thereto.  Each brief shall not exceed 10 pages.  The court will set the new hearing date.  Defendant should also include a statement confirming that the fees sought were in fact billed without deduction and paid without deduction.