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 does not define prevailing party, incorporates Arizona law, and does not conflict with the statute. Because CSK's rejected settlement offer exceeded the total judgment American obtained, CSK was the successful party from the offer date and was entitled to contractual fees, subject to apportionment for its unsuccessful counterclaim. Justice TIMMER, dissenting, would have affirmed the trial court because the contract required fees for the single party prevailing on the lawsuit's merits.