Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: attorneys fee

Not usually; if the tort action was preceded by and related to a contract with a broad attorney-fee clause, it could happen. Also, there may be an award of attorney fees if the action were completely baseless and frivolous or brought with malice.

This answer is based on general law and policy; I'll do a little research later today and if I find anything that would lead me to a different conclusion I'll post a follow up (gotta run right now or I'd do the research first!).

Re: attorneys fee

After looking at a dozen or so California cases, I think this matter is controlled by the decision of the California Supreme Court is Martin v. Szeto (2004), published at 32 Cal.4th 445. Attorney fees are a proper element of damages for a successful plaintiff forced to sue to correct a slander of his or her title to real property. However, I find no case authorizing a court to award attorney fees to a prevailing defendant.

Exceptions exist for defendants who prevail in defending against a frivolous or malicious complaint; there is also the so-called "tort of another" rule that says when a person is required to bring OR DEFEND an action due to the tort of another, the person may recover losses including the value of his time spent in defending, and attorney fees. This rule obviously wouldn't apply when it is the defendant himself who is accused of the slander of title.

Re: attorneys fee

I am puzzled as to Mr. Whipple's citation to Martin v. Szeto (2004)32 Cal.4th 445. In that case, the California Supreme Court held that the attorney's fees provision of Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.7, only applid to actions involving peace officers or public entities employing peace officers. "For these reasons, we conclude that section 1021.7 authorizes courts to award attorneys' fees in actions for libel or slander only when a peace officer or an officer's public employer is a party, and when the action arises out of the performance of an officer's duties." That decision resolved a previous conflict in application of that statute between the First and Fourth District Courts of Appeal.

A prevailing party in an action for slander of title can recover fees if they win, if they incur fees to remove a cloud on their title. Attorney�s fees incurred in removing the doubt cast by the disparagement of title are a proper element of damages to be awarded to the plaintiffs in a slander of title action. (Appel v. Burman (2nd Dist. 1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 1209, 1216 citing Glass v. Gulf Oil Corp. (1st Dist. 1970) 12 Cal.App.3d 412, 424-425.)

There is certainly no statute that provides for you to pay a defendant's attorney's fees, assuming that the defendant is a private party. If you have no contract that provides for fees between you, then there would be no fee award.

The only way that I can see that you would have to pay attorney's fees to a defendant is if the defendant brought an Anti-SLAPP motion to strike against you, and you lost the motion. I have not been able to locate any case law that states whether a slander of title action would be one of the suits subject to anti-SLAPP motions.

Very truly yours,