Procedural Posture
Plaintiff tenant appealed a judgment and a post judgment order from the Superior Court of Orange County (California), which granted defendant landlord's motion for nonsuit of the tenant's action alleging breach of contract and related claims arising from the landlord's termination of a commercial lease. The trial court's award of costs to the landlord included expert witness fees pursuant to a lease provision.
Overview
The lease required substantial investment by the landlord to build a new shopping center, while the tenant had few obligations until the lease began. The parties agreed that unless the lease began by a specified date, either party would have the right to terminate for any reason. The landlord was unable to obtain the necessary approvals for a traffic signal, litigation lawyer and the shopping center was never built. The landlord exercised its right to terminate. The court noted that because the contract was integrated, Code Civ. Proc., § 1856, precluded the use of extrinsic evidence such as drafts of the lease. The clear language of the lease, interpreted in accordance with Civ. Code, §§ 1636, 1638, 1641, gave both parties the absolute right to terminate. Because the mutual termination provision was conditioned on notice, it did not result in an illusory agreement. The expert witness fees awarded by the trial court were allowable as costs under Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (b)(1), without any requirement of specially pleading and proving such costs at trial because the lease contract specifically provided that expert fees were recoverable costs.
Outcome
The court affirmed the judgment and affirmed the postjudgment order.