Clar v. Cacciola (1987) 193 Cal.App.3d 1032 concerned competing claims to priority of two deeds of trust affecting a residential property. The parties to the action, the beneficiaries of the competing deeds of trust, were not in contractual privity with each other. But they each claimed priority over the other and the plaintiffs sought to void the others' deed of trust. The trial court decided the action in favor of the defendants, who sought statutory attorney fees as prevailing parties in the action, which did not include a claim for foreclosure. The trial court denied the fees and the appellate court affirmed concluding that there was no relationship between the parties--signatories of separate deeds of trust--that created a contractual right to fees. Nor was there the same practical liability for them as was found in Saucedo based on an owner's incentive to pay fees to protect his or her equity in the property. (Id. at pp. 1037-1039.)