Opinion
G053122
07-11-2018
MICHAEL COLACO et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CAVOTEC SA et al., Defendants and Respondents.
Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth, Jason H. Anderson, Jason de Bretteville and Bradley E. Marrett for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Greenberg Gross, Alan A. Greenberg, Wayne R. Gross and Howard M. Privette for Defendants and Respondents.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2012-00601735) OPINION Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, William D. Claster, Judge. Reversed and remanded. Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth, Jason H. Anderson, Jason de Bretteville and Bradley E. Marrett for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Greenberg Gross, Alan A. Greenberg, Wayne R. Gross and Howard M. Privette for Defendants and Respondents.
* * *
Michael Colaco and Inet Airport Systems (Inet) appeal from a postjudgment order awarding Cavotec Inet US, Inc. over $4 million in attorney fees as the prevailing party in the underlying lawsuit which also is the subject of a companion appeal. In that companion appeal we reversed the judgment and remanded the matter back to the trial court with directions to enter a new judgment. (Colaco et al., v. Cavotec, SA, et al. (July 11, 2018, G052619 [nonpub. opn.].)
Because we reversed the underlying judgment, we also must reverse the postjudgment attorney fee award because an attorney fee award cannot stand without the underlying judgment to support it. (Gilman v. Dalby (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 606, 620 ["In light of our conclusion that the judgment must be reversed . . . , it no longer can be said that defendants are the prevailing parties. Accordingly, we must reverse the award of [attorney] fees and costs [to defendants], and thus need not address [plaintiff's] contention that the award was erroneous. . . ."]; Gillan v. City of San Marino (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 1033, 1053 ["reversal of the judgment necessarily compels the reversal of the award of fees as costs to the prevailing party based on the judgment"].)
DISPOSITION
The postjudgment order awarding attorney fees is reversed. Appellants are entitled to costs on appeal.
ARONSON, J. WE CONCUR: O'LEARY, P. J. MOORE, J.