Rohde v. Clark
Plaintiff appeals from a postjudgment order awarding defendant[1] his attorney fees based on provisions found in the contract between the parties. Plaintiff contends the award was inequitable because defendant breached the contract. Defendant prevailed in the trial court by establishing plaintiff’s claim on the promissory note and second deed of trust was barred by the antideficiency statutes. We conclude the trial court properly awarded attorney fees to the prevailing defendant, even though he prevailed by establishing the contract was unenforceable. Accordingly, we affirm.
Comments on Rohde v. Clark