You searched for: "Fee Shifting/Prevailing Party"
Search Results
August 1, 2025
Plaintiff-Contractor Awarded Intended Contract Rate After Bench Trial, No “Prevailing Party” For Purposes of Fee Shifting Provision
On June 23, 2025, Justice Melissa A. Crane issued a decision following a bench trial, awarding a contractor the rate intended by the parties rather than a rate that was the product of mutual mistake, and finding that neither party was entitled to invoke the contract’s fee-shifting provision. The case is Titan Constr. Servs., LLC v Board of Mgrs. of PS 90 Condominium, Index No. Index No. 652243/2021. Read More
November 11, 2024
Fee Shifting Denied When Purported Fee-Shifting Clause Lacked Clear Language Suggesting Fee Shifting in Litigation
On September 26, 2024, Justice Joel M. Cohen of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Bloodhound Partners LLC v. Wearsafe Labs Holding LLC, Index No. 654718/2022, granting a motion for entry of a default judgment but denying attorneys' fees to plaintiffs on the ground that the purported fee-shifting clause on which plaintiffs relied lacked "clear language suggesting fee shifting in litigating," explaining: Read More
October 31, 2022
Fee Shifting Between Partners Denied Without “Unmistakably Clear” Language of Intent
In a decision dated October 20, 2022, in Sage Systems, Inc. v. Liss, 2022 NY Slip Op 05918, the New York Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division and rejected plaintiff’s argument that a broad, unrestrictive indemnification provision in the partnership agreement entitled it to attorney’s fees related to direct claims between the partners. The Court explained: Read More
