PalacioDel Mar Homeowners Assn. v. McMahon
Defendants Arnold A. McMahon (Arnold) and Elizabeth J. McMahon (Elizabeth) (collectively, the McMahons) failed to appear for trial.[1] They appeal from the resulting judgment for plaintiff Palacio Del Mar Homeowners Association, Inc. (Palacio). They contend they lacked notice of trial. They further contend Palacio was not entitled to recover compensatory or punitive damages on its fraudulent transfer cause of action.
The McMahons had adequate notice of trial and Palacio was entitled to recover compensatory damages, if any. But we reverse because those compensatory damages cannot include attorney fees that Palacio incurred prosecuting this action against the McMahons or against those who were joint tortfeasors with the McMahons. Furthermore, Palacio did not offer substantial evidence of the McMahons ability to pay the punitive damage award. Court remand for a retrial on compensatory damages.
Comments on PalacioDel Mar Homeowners Assn. v. McMahon