And, under Munden, because possession was no longer an issue, the court properly ordered judgment as well for the older rents due under the lease together with attorney fees and costs as prevailing party. No rent doubling provision is in the lease. Thus, doubling was not an available remedy, either under the statute or the lease. Here, the findings are not clear when discussing the old defaults compared to the new ones, resulting in some confusion. Compounding this problem, respondents prepared the findings and conclusions, and appellant prepared the judgment.
Equitable principles are irrelevant.
Similarly, it is unnecessary to discuss whether or not the court had discretion to award double damages. Both parties request attorney fees. The Hwangs' request for fees under the lease is granted. Because M H 2 did not prevail here, it is not entitled to attorney fees. We hold the trial court did not err in any of the ways alleged by M H 2 and affirm.