Judge: Curtis A. Kin, Case: 20STCV49564, Date: 2022-12-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV49564    Hearing Date: December 20, 2022    Dept: 72

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES

Date:               12/20/22 (8:30 AM)

Case:               Rachel Martin v. Sylvester Harris, Jr. et al. (20STCV49564)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Rachel Martin’s Motion for Attorney Fees is GRANTED.

Plaintiff Rachel Martin moves for an award of $24,255 in attorney fees against defendants Sylvester Harris, Jr. and Debra Harris, as Trustees of the Harris Trust, pursuant to Los Angeles Municipal Code (“LAMC”) § 151.10 and Civil Code § 1942.5(i).                           

In the fourth cause of action, plaintiff asserted a violation of Civil Code § 1942.5 based on retaliatory eviction. Civil Code § 1942.5(i) states: “In any action brought for damages for retaliatory eviction, the court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party if either party requests attorney’s fees upon the initiation of the action.” The Court found in favor of plaintiff. (10/5/22 Minute Order at 2.) Further, plaintiff requested fees for this cause of action in the Complaint. (Compl. ¶ 37.) Accordingly, plaintiff may recover fees for prevailing on the fourth cause of action.

Defendants maintain that “the issues concerning retaliatory eviction were a very small portion of the case,” thus purportedly justifying a reduced fee award. However, “[a]pportionment is not required when the issues in the fee and nonfee claims are so inextricably intertwined that it would be impractical or impossible to separate the attorney's time into compensable and noncompensable units.” (Graciano v. Robinson Ford Sales, Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 140, 159.) Here, the issues concerning plaintiff’s other causes of action (specifically, the claims for negligence and breach of the implied warrant of habitability) were inextricably intertwined with plaintiff’s retaliatory eviction claim.  In short, plaintiff complained to defendants and governmental entities about the conditions of her unit because the substandard conditions in the unit rendered it uninhabitable. Due to such complaints, defendants sought to illegally evict plaintiff three times. Thus, the retaliatory eviction claim arose from the negligence and breach of implied warranty of habitability claims. Under these circumstances, it would be impractical and impossible to allocate the fees between the compensable retaliatory eviction claim and these other claims brought by plaintiff. 

As for the amount of fees, defendants do not contest the reasonableness of the amount requested by plaintiff, and the billing entries presented by plaintiff appear reasonable. (Brinton Decl. ¶ 6 & Ex. A.) Accordingly, using the appropriate lodestar approach, and based on the foregoing findings and in view of the totality of the circumstances, the Court finds that the total and reasonable amount of attorney fees and costs incurred for the work performed in connection with the fourth cause of action for violation of Civil Code § 1942.5 is $24,255.00. Such fees are awarded to plaintiff Rachel Martin against defendants Sylvester Harris, Jr. and Debra Harris, as Trustees of the Harris Trust.