American Power Products, Inc., a California Corporation; Lfmg/app, LLC, an Arizona Corporation…

Summary

The court held that Arizona's statutory definition of the successful party applies to a contractual attorney-fee provision when the contract incorporates Arizona law, does not define prevailing party, and does not conflict with the statute. Because CSK's rejected offer of judgment may have exceeded the judgment ultimately obtained by American, the trial court was required to compare the amounts and apportion fees accordingly. Justice Timmer, dissenting, would have affirmed the trial court's award because the contract's plain meaning required fees for the single party prevailing on the merits.