Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Leasing Hotline
No Prevailing Party in Settlement
Where the parties settle their dispute, the court will not declare one party the 'prevailing party' for the purpose of collecting attorneys' fees. Whipps, L.L.C. v. Kaufman, Vidal, Hileman & Ramlow, P.C., No. DA 06-0028, Supreme Court of Montana, March 13, 2007.
The landlord and tenant entered into a three-year lease for commercial property. Three months into the lease, the tenant vacated the property, alleging the property was unacceptable for its use. The landlord filed a complaint, seeking unspecified damages. The tenant counterclaimed for fraud, constructive fraud, and breach of contract.
The parties eventually settled their claims; the tenant agreed to pay the landlord $14,110 plus taxable costs. The settlement documents stated that payment by the tenant was not an admission of fault; they did not state that the tenant was liable to the landlord or that the landlord had suffered any damage. After acceptance of the settlement, the landlord moved to be declared the 'prevailing party' under the terms of the parties' lease and sought attorneys' fees.
The district court denied the motion, and the landlord appealed. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the district court properly determined that based upon the settlement, neither party was the 'prevailing party' under the terms of the lease. It considered that the parties agreed to settle, and, therefore, both parties suffered a loss and gained a victory.
No Prevailing Party in Settlement
Where the parties settle their dispute, the court will not declare one party the 'prevailing party' for the purpose of collecting attorneys' fees. Whipps, L.L.C. v. Kaufman, Vidal, Hileman & Ramlow, P.C., No. DA 06-0028, Supreme Court of Montana, March 13, 2007.
The landlord and tenant entered into a three-year lease for commercial property. Three months into the lease, the tenant vacated the property, alleging the property was unacceptable for its use. The landlord filed a complaint, seeking unspecified damages. The tenant counterclaimed for fraud, constructive fraud, and breach of contract.
The parties eventually settled their claims; the tenant agreed to pay the landlord $14,110 plus taxable costs. The settlement documents stated that payment by the tenant was not an admission of fault; they did not state that the tenant was liable to the landlord or that the landlord had suffered any damage. After acceptance of the settlement, the landlord moved to be declared the 'prevailing party' under the terms of the parties' lease and sought attorneys' fees.
The district court denied the motion, and the landlord appealed. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the district court properly determined that based upon the settlement, neither party was the 'prevailing party' under the terms of the lease. It considered that the parties agreed to settle, and, therefore, both parties suffered a loss and gained a victory.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.