In Silver Creek, LLC v. BlackRock Realty Advisors, Inc. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 1533, a buyer agreed to purchase two commercial properties for $ 29.75 million and deposited $ 1.13 million into escrow accounts. During escrow a disagreement developed regarding the terms of certain loan assumption agreements. Shortly after the deadline for closing, the seller notified the buyer it considered the agreements and escrow terminated for failure to comply with the closing deadline. Unable to resolve their dispute, the seller filed a lawsuit seeking a declaration it had validly terminated the agreements and was entitled to retain the deposit. The buyer filed a cross-complaint alleging the seller had breach its obligation to act reasonably in approving a loan release and its purported termination of the agreements was invalid. The buyer sought specific performance of the purchase agreements or, alternatively, an award of damages for the seller's breach of the agreements and return of its deposit. (Id. at p. 1536.) Following a bench trial the court found in favor of the seller on its complaint and the buyer's cross-complaint but concluded the buyer was entitled to the return of its deposit. (Silver Creek, supra, 173 Cal.App.4th at p. 1537.) The trial court denied the seller's motion for attorney fees on the contract under Civil Code section 1717, finding it did not win an unqualified victory because the buyer was entitled to the return of its deposit and further concluding, because the buyer had succeeded on its claim for the deposit, it could not determine that one party had obtained greater relief than the other. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding the trial court had abused its discretion in concluding the seller had not obtained greater relief than the buyer. "The record reveals that the property issue was the most important to the parties and 'greater' in terms of monetary value--about $ 29.75 million at issue for the properties versus about $ 1.13 million at issue for the deposit. Thus, the seller achieved its main litigation objective, while the buyer clearly failed to accomplish its desired goal even though it obtained the return of its deposit." (Id. at p. 1540.)