Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 22STCV00417, Date: 2023-04-25 Tentative Ruling

Please notify Department 52 via email at smcdept52@lacourt.org and indicate that the parties are submitting on the tentative ruling. Please provide the attorney's name and represented party. Please notify the opposing side via email if submitting on the Court's tentative ruling.

Case Number: 22STCV00417    Hearing Date: April 25, 2023    Dept: 52

Tentative Ruling:   

Plaintiff Bank of the West’s Motion for Attorney Fees

Plaintiff Bank of the West moves for $56,873 in attorney fees from defendants D&C Global, Inc., Cajun Buggies, LLC, and Xunhao Wang aka Denny Wang. 

Plaintiff successfully brought causes of action against defendants for breaching two promissory notes, two loan agreements, two guaranties, and a commercial card agreement.  Each contract provides that the lender shall recover attorney fees and legal expenses incurred enforcing the contracts.  (James Decl., Ex. A, p. 1; Ex. B, p. 5; Ex. C, p. 1; Ex. D, p. 1; Ex. E, p. 1; Ex. F, p. 1; Ex. G, p. 1.)  Plaintiff therefore may collect reasonable attorney fees as the prevailing parties under the contracts.

Plaintiff’s claim of $56,873 in attorney fees is unreasonable.  In determining what constitutes a reasonable fee, the court ordinarily begins with the lodestar, that is, “the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate.” (PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095.)  Plaintiff’s counsel’s rates, ranging from $275 to $390 hourly, are reasonable.  But plaintiff claims a greatly excessive number of hours.

In calculating the lodestar, the court must determine whether the tasks performed by an attorney were necessary and whether the amount of time billed for each task was reasonable.  (Baxter v. Bock (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 775, 793.)  The moving party has the burden of proof on these issues.  (Ibid.)  For a “voluminous fee application,” courts may “make across-the-board percentage cuts either in the number of hours claimed or in the final lodestar figure.”  (Warren v. Kia Motors America, Inc. (2018) 30 Cal.App.5th 24, 41.)

Most of plaintiff’s fees were incurred for its successful motion for summary judgment.  Plaintiff billed over 100 hours for the motion.  This action was a relatively simple debt collection case.  The motion required minimal legal research.  Succeeding on summary judgment boiled down to identifying the appropriate provisions of each contract and the appropriate discovery responses in which defendants admitted almost all necessary facts.  

Plaintiff’s counsel’s bill includes numerous unreasonable entries.  For the separate statement of undisputed facts alone, plaintiff billed 31.9 hours across nine entries from October 6, 2022, to November 3, 2022.  (James Decl., Ex. I, pp. 19-28.)  The separate statement was 34 pages with 122 material facts.  It was not short but did not reasonably require 31.9 hours of work by attorneys.  Similarly, plaintiff billed 18.6 hours to prepare the two declarations (totaling 26 pages, excluding exhibits) in support of the motion for summary judgment.  (Id., pp. 19-28.) 

Plaintiff also billed some tasks at attorney rates that could have been done by a paralegal.  For example, on October 17, 2022, Jacqueline James billed 4.9 hours at $275 hourly for “preparation of evidence binders in support of MSJ.”  (James Decl., Ex. I, p. 21.)  That task did not require 4.9 hours of work by an attorney. 

Based on its review of counsel’s billing records, the court will reduce the lodestar by 20% across the board, resulting in $45,498.40 in attorney fees.

Disposition

Plaintiff Bank of the West’s motion for attorney fees is granted in part.  Plaintiff Bank of the West shall recover $45,498.40 in attorney fees from defendants D&C Global, Inc., Cajun Buggies, LLC, and Xunhao Wang aka Denny Wang, jointly and severally.