TENTATIVE RULING: The unopposed motion is granted in part. Plaintiffs are awarded $813,737.45 in prejudgment interest, attorney fees, and costs. 

BACKGROUND 

This is a contract action in which Plaintiffs allege that they contracted with Defendant to install sewer lines on a construction project, and that Defendant negligently and defectively completed the work, causing Plaintiffs to pay for repairs. (Compl. ¶¶ 10–14.) On 11/6/20, Plaintiffs filed their complaint, alleging against Defendant and its owner the following causes of action: (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Breach of Express and Implied Warranty; (3) Negligence; and (4) Alter Ego Liability  

On 3/11/24, trial of this action commenced. On 3/20/24, the jury returned a verdict for Plaintiffs in the amount of $950,888.12, and the Court entered judgment in favor of Plaintiffs on 4/8/24. On 4/25/24, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion. No opposition has been filed to date. 

ANALYSIS 

“Every person who is entitled under any judgment to receive damages based upon a cause of action in contract where the claim was unliquidated, may also recover interest thereon from a date prior to the entry of judgment as the court may, in its discretion, fix, but in no event earlier than the date the action was filed.” (Civ. Code § 3287, subd. (b).) “If a contract entered into after January 1, 1986, does not stipulate a legal rate of interest, the obligation shall bear interest at a rate of 10 percent per annum after a breach.” (Civ. Code § 3289, subd. (b).) 

Here, Plaintiffs argue that they are entitled to recover prejudgment interest at the statutory rate of 10% per annum, beginning on 4/22/20, the date on which they notified Defendant of the repair costs, until 4/8/24, the date on which the Court entered judgment. (Pl.’s Mot. 5:10–17.) “As a result, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover prejudgment interest in the amount of $380,355.24 [10% of $950,888.12= $95,088.81 x 4 (years) = $380,355.24].” (Id. at 5:16–17.) 

The Court notes that the statute expressly states that the date from which any prejudgment interest runs may not be earlier than the filing of the action. (Civ. Code § 3287, subd. (b).) Here, the instant action was filed on 11/6/20, and, as such, Plaintiffs cannot recover prejudgment interest running from any date prior to 11/6/20. Therefore, Plaintiffs are entitled to prejudgment interest from 11/6/20 to 4/8/24. Since no interest rate is specified, the rate to be applied is 10% for an award of $325,386.09 (calculated as follows ($950,888.12) x (10%) = $95,088.81per year. ($95,088.81 per year)/(365 days) = $260.52 per day in interest. $260.52 x 1,249 days between 11/6/20 to 4/8/24 = $325,386.09). (Civ. Code § 3289, subd. (b).) 

“In any action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides that attorney’s fees and costs, which are incurred to enforce that contract, shall be awarded either to one of the parties or to the prevailing party, then the party who is determined to be the party prevailing on the contract, whether he or she is the party specified in the contract or not, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees in addition to other costs.” (Civ. Code § 1717, subd. (a).) 

Here, Plaintiffs state that “the contract between Plaintiffs and Mesa specifically provides that attorneys’ fees and costs shall be awarded to the prevailing party.” (Pl.’s Mot. 6:24–25.) Specifically, the contract entered into between the parties provides that “the party prevailing in such action will be entitled to recover from the other party all of its costs of action, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, experts’ fees and costs and fees and costs incurred in connection with any appeals or to enforce any judgment.” (Ex. 7 to Decl. of Shawn D. Morris, p. 33, ¶ 22.3.) 

In determining a reasonable fee award, the Court begins with the lodestar method of calculation, i.e., the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate.¿(Karton v. Ari Design & Construction, Inc. (2021) 61 Cal.App.5th 734, 744; PLCM Group, Inc. v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095–1096.) Here, Plaintiffs seek to recover $331,103.10 in attorney fees, encompassing 1357.99 hours of their attorneys’ time. (Ex. 8 to Morris Decl.)  

Plaintiffs argue that the amount sought is reasonable because the matter would have proceeded to trial much earlier if Defendant had not sought a continuance to add an ultimately unnecessary party to the action, and because Defendant refused Plaintiffs’ attempts to settle the matter before trial. (Pl.’s Mot. 8:15–24.) Plaintiffs proffer an itemized list of time entries detailing their attorneys’ work on this matter. (Ex. 8 to Morris Decl.) The Court further notes that Defendant has failed to file any opposition to the instant motion, and therefore does not challenge the reasonableness of Plaintiffs’ attorney fees incurred. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion to recover $331,103.10 in reasonable attorney fees. 

“In addition to the prevailing party costs identified above, Plaintiffs incurred costs related to attorney services that included travel related expenses for case investigation and trial” in the amount of $10,618.30. (Pl.’s Mot. 8:25–9:2, citing Ex. 10 to Morris Decl.) Plaintiffs further assert that per the express terms of the agreement, “Plaintiffs should be able to recover expert costs incurred, which totals $107,498.75.” (Id. at 9:17–18, citing Ex. 9 to Morris Decl.) The Court agrees. 

Finally, Plaintiffs assert that they incurred costs and expenses totaling $39,131.21, which encompasses: (1) $930.01 in filing and motion fees; (2) $1,061.24 in jury fees; (3) $11,929.01 in deposition costs; (4) $796.75 in process server fees; (5) $2,192.70 in witness fees; (6) $8,105.38 in court reporter fees; (7) $9,522.59 in models and photocopies of exhibits; (8) $593.53 in electronic filing/service fees; and (9) $4,000.00 in mediation costs. (Ex. 6 to Morris Decl.)  

The Court again notes that Defendant has failed to oppose the instant motion and challenge the purported costs incurred by Plaintiffs in this action. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion to recover $157,248.26 in costs and expenses. 

CONCLUSION