Opinion
A152826
03-21-2018
KAREN A. FAGUNDES, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TIMOTHY W. SILVA, Defendant and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. CIV538256)
Karen Fagundes appealed the award of attorney fees in her litigation with her brother, respondent Timothy Silva, over the 1994 sale of a family home. In this memorandum opinion, we affirm.
A memorandum opinion contains "little or no reference to the evidence or the procedural history of the action and . . . an abbreviated discussion of the relevant legal issues and authorities." (People v. Garcia (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 847, 850.) --------
Fagundes and Silva have a brother and two sisters who all inherited their mother's Redwood City home after the mother died in 1993. Silva bought out his siblings' interest in the home in August 1994 and took title of the property. Years later a dispute arose over the sale, and the brother sued Silva in February 2013. The brother lost following a bench trial, and the case was dismissed in August 2015. Fagundes then initiated this separate lawsuit against Silva based on his statements made in the first lawsuit. The trial court granted Silva's motion to strike Fagundes's complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, and this court affirmed in an unpublished opinion. (Fagundes v. Silva (May 18, 2017, A149097).)
Back in the trial court, Silva sought his attorney fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, subdivision (c)(1), which entitles a prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike his or her attorney fees and costs. The trial court awarded Silva $16,986 in attorney fees under the statute, and Fagundes appealed. In her notice designating the record on appeal, Fagundes did not designate Silva's moving papers seeking attorney fees.
In her appellate briefing, Fagundes mostly repeats arguments about the merits of her underlying lawsuit. She does not challenge the reasonableness of the attorney fees awarded. As for Silva's legal entitlement to fees, Fagundes cites cases that are inapposite because they do not address fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, subdivision (c)(1). She thus has provided no factual or legal basis to set aside the award of attorney fees.
The order awarding Silva his attorney fees is affirmed. Silva shall recover his costs on appeal.
/s/_________
Humes, P.J. We concur: /s/_________
Margulies, J. /s/_________
Dondero, J.