Court Opinion

ID: 9807296
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 19:58:21.855487+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:31:41.936139
License: Public Domain

WATT, J.,
with whom KAUGER and COLBERT, JJ. join, concurring specially:
€ 1 While I concur that a strict reading of the statutes allows for the award of prevailing party attorney fees, I believe equity calls for a careful examination of each parties' conduct that spawned this litigation.
T 2 The majority opinion finds that plaintiff prevailed on his lien foreclosure claim and Boulton "prevailed" on plaintiff's quiet title action.
T3 Both conclusions are supported by their respective statutes but this case is a prime example of why it is the obligation of the trial court judge upon remand to have broad discretion on the awarding of statutory attorneys fees. The trial court is familiar with the parties and has observed their demeanor and the reasons for their actions below.
{4 It is the trial court judge who is in the best position to rule upon these motions for attorney fees, if any, to the parties based upon, not only the law but, their conduct during the trial court proceedings.
T5 I would urge the trial court judge to exercise sound discretion in deciding if, indeed, both parties should be allowed appeal-related attorney fees.