The trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that neither party prevailed in this action against a subcontractor and its bonding company. The plaintiff city won on liability but was awarded only nominal damages though it had sought $3.4 million. The trial court could properly conclude that the win on damages was not a total victory for the subcontractor and surety bonding company since the subcontractor’s cross-claim for damages for breach of contract (which would have benefitted the surety as an offset) was defeated by the liability determination in the city’s favor.