Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05908/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05908-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARTIN ENG,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK, et

al,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C09-5908 BZ

ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEFING

Having reviewed the papers filed in connection with

defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees, IT IS ORDERED as

follows:

1. By August 4, 2010, defendant shall file a

supplemental brief citing to any authority it has for the

proposition that a party who drafts a narrow attorney’s fee

provision in a standardized contract, such as the one at issue

here which appears to limit an award of fees to “actions to

collect a note,” may seek to interpret it to permit that party

to collect the fees defendant seeks here. As the Court reads

both Hsu v. Abbara, 9 Cal.4th 863, (1995) and Pacific Custom

Case 3:09-cv-05908-BZ Document 57 Filed 07/27/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Pools, Inc. v. Turner Constr. Co., 79 Cal.App.4th 1254 (2000),

in those cases the court was interpreting provisions which

awarded fees to the prevailing party, and the issue generally

before the court was to identify the prevailing party. Here,

there is no issue over who prevailed; the issue is instead

what is the scope of agreement between the parties with

respect to fees. Section 1717, in the Court’s view, merely

makes the fee provision reciprocal; it does not expand its

scope.

2. If plaintiff wishes, he may respond to the

defendant’s brief by August 11, 2010. 

3. The hearing presently scheduled for August 4, 2010 is

VACATED. The Court will scheduled a new hearing, if one is

required. 

Dated: July 27, 2010 

 Bernard Zimmerman 

 United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\ENG V. UNITED COMMERCIAL\ORD REQUIRING SUPPLMENTAL

BRIEFING.wpd

Case 3:09-cv-05908-BZ Document 57 Filed 07/27/10 Page 2 of 2