§Why CasetextPricing

DISPUTESUITE.COM v. SCOREINC.COM

Appellants’ Petition for Review

10 Cited authorities

  1. Chia-Lee Hsu v. Abbara

    9 Cal.4th 863 (Cal. 1995)   Cited 764 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party is entitled to attorney fees under Civil Code section 1717 even when the party prevails on the ground that the contract is inapplicable, invalid, unenforceable, or nonexistent, if the other party would have been entitled to attorney fees had it prevailed

  2. Scott Co. v. Blount, Inc.

    20 Cal.4th 1103 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 286 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding that the plaintiff was a prevailing party despite the fact that the plaintiff originally sought $2 million in damages, but recovered only $440,000

  3. Carnes v. Zamani

    488 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 128 times
    Affirming the denial of a similar motion as untimely

  4. Frog Creek Partners, LLC v. Vance Brown, Inc.

    206 Cal.App.4th 515 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 90 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Denying fees for prevailing on interim motion that did not resolve substantive dispute

  5. In re Estate of Drummond

    149 Cal.App.4th 46 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 66 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Denying attorney's fees because “appellants obtained only an interim victory, based on [the attorney] having attempted to pursue his claims in the wrong forum”

  6. PNEC Corp. v. Meyer

    190 Cal.App.4th 66 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 33 times
    Holding court may award attorney fees to the moving party under section 1717 following dismissal of an action on a contract for forum non conveniens even though case could be refiled in another state, citing Profit Concepts and other cases reaching the same result

  7. Pueblo Radiology Medical Group Inc. v. Gerlach

    163 Cal.App.4th 826 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 29 times
    Affirming award of contractual attorney fees to individuals sued as alter ego defendants before trial against corporation had taken place

  8. Profit Concepts Management, Inc. v. Griffith

    162 Cal.App.4th 950 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 29 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Profit Concepts, the court affirmed the trial court's award of attorneys' fees to the defendant where it had dismissed a contract claim for lack of personal jurisdiction, reasoning that "[t]he case in California has been finally resolved" and nothing had been awarded on the plaintiff's complaint.

  9. Kandy Kiss of California, Inc. v. Tex-Ellent, Inc.

    209 Cal.App.4th 604 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 2 times   2 Legal Analyses

    No. B234541. 2012-09-21 KANDY KISS OF CALIFORNIA, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TEX–ELLENT, INC., Defendant and Respondent. See 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Judgment, § 194 et seq. Ezra Brutzkus Gubner, Woodland Hills, Mark D. Brutzkus, Todd M. Lander, Nicholas A. Rozansky, and David A. Tashroudian for Plaintiff and Appellant. We concur: FLIER See 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Judgment, § 194 et seq. Ezra Brutzkus Gubner, Woodland Hills, Mark D. Brutzkus, Todd M. Lander,

  10. Rule 8.25 - Service, filing, and filing fees

    Cal. R. 8.25   Cited 58 times

    (a)Service (1) Before filing any document, a party must serve one copy of the document on the attorney for each party separately represented, on each unrepresented party, and on any other person or entity when required by statute or rule. (2) The party must attach to the document presented for filing a proof of service showing service on each person or entity required to be served under (1), or, if using an electronic filing service provider's automatic electronic document service, the party may