Klun v. Klun

Summary

The Colorado Supreme Court held that a settlement agreement's fee-shifting provision applied to the plaintiffs' claims concerning alleged access, irrigation, conversion, and trespass rights. Because the plaintiffs' claims substantively sought to enforce the settlement agreement and the defendant prevailed on all claims, the court reversed the water court's denial of attorney fees. The case was remanded for determination of reasonable trial and appellate fees.

Holdings

1. Claims constitute an action to enforce a settlement agreement when, in substance, they seek relief based on alleged rights and obligations under that agreement, even if they are labeled as declaratory, injunctive, conversion, or trespass claims rather than as breach-of-contract or specific-performance claims.
2. A defendant who prevailed on all claims was entitled to recover reasonable trial and appellate attorney fees under the settlement agreement's fee-shifting clause.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiffs' claims constituted an action to enforce the settlement agreement within the meaning of the agreement's fee-shifting provision.
2. Whether the fee-shifting provision entitled defendant, as the prevailing party, to recover reasonable attorney fees incurred at trial and on appeal.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded