Judge: Curtis A. Kin, Case: BC710527, Date: 2022-09-22 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: BC710527 Hearing Date: September 22, 2022 Dept: 72
MOTION FOR ATTORNEY
FEES, EXPENSES, AND COSTS
Date: 9/22/22 (8:30 AM)
Case: Gerardo Ruiz et al. v. Kia Motors America Inc. (BC710527)
Plaintiffs Gerardo Ruiz and Lupe
Ruiz’s Motion for Attorney Fees, Costs, and Expenses is GRANTED IN PART.
Plaintiffs’ requests to take
judicial notice of court orders in other actions are DENIED as irrelevant. (Mangini v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (1994) 7
Cal.4th 1057, 1063.)
Defendant Kia Motors America
Inc.’s evidentiary objections 6-33 are SUSTAINED. All other evidentiary
objections from plaintiffs and defendant are OVERRULED.
The parties agree that plaintiffs
Gerardo Ruiz and Lupe Ruiz were prevailing parties in this action and, under
Civil Code § 1794(d), may recover as part of the judgment a sum to cover
attorney fees based on actual time expended and determined by the Court to have
been reasonably incurred in connection with the commencement and prosecution of
this action.
The Court finds that
the hourly rates of charged by counsel for plaintiffs in this action are
reasonable. (Shahian Decl. ¶¶ 37-74; Daghighian Decl. ¶¶ 3, 4.) However, the
Court notes that the higher billing rates must necessarily correlate with
reduced time spent completing tasks due to the greater experience that such
rates indicate.
The Court has reviewed
the billing entries from counsel for plaintiffs and finds that there have been
some excessive billings for certain matters (Shahian Decl. ¶¶ 76, 77 & Exs.
30, 31; Daghighian Decl. ¶ 5 & Ex. A.) Accordingly, the Court makes the
following reductions:
Strategic
Legal Practices, APC - $11,595.50 in reductions
·
On 6/11/18, Areg Sakissian billed 2.8 hours for
drafting the complaint and summons and reviewing the client file. The Complaint
was boilerplate. This billing entry is reduced by 1.8 hours, or $738.00
based on Sakissian’s hourly rate of $410.00.
·
On 6/28/18, Sakissian billed 4 hours for
reviewing and revising discovery. The discovery was boilerplate. (Jackson Decl.
¶ 12 & Ex. C.) This billing entry is reduced by 2 hours, or $820.00.
·
On 7/20/18, Sakissian billed 1 hour for drafting
a deposition notice of the person most knowledgeable. This is a routine
deposition notice. This billing entry is reduced by 0.6 hours, or $246.00.
·
On 7/24/18, Sakissian billed 0.7 hours for
drafting the Case Management Statement. This is a routine form. This billing
entry is reduced by 0.2 hours, or $82.00.
·
On 9/18/18, Erin Melody-Rosenfield billed 4.4
hours for drafting the opposition to the demurrer and motion to strike. The
oppositions appear to contain arguments used to oppose demurrers and motions to
strike in other actions. This billing entry is reduced by 1.0 hour, or $595.00
based on Melody-Rosenfield’s hourly rate of $595.00.
·
On 6/10/19 and 6/11/19, Baber Khan billed a
total of 14.1 hours for drafting a motion to compel further responses and
separate statement. Even though this motion concerned 40 document requests,
this is still excessive considering this motion concerned the routine first set
of discovery. This billing entry is reduced by 5 hours, or $2,000.00
based on Khan’s hourly rate of $400.00.
·
On 6/16/19 and 6/17/19, Sean Crandall billed a
total of 6.2 hours for reviewing, revising, and finalizing the motion to compel
further responses worked on by Khan. Even though this motion concerned 40
document requests, this is still excessive considering this motion concerned
the routine first set of discovery. This billing entry is reduced by 2 hours,
or $770.00 based on Crandall’s hourly rate of $385.00.
·
On 8/20/19, Tionna Dolin billed 2 hours for
preparation for and attending the hearing on the motion to compel further
discovery responses. There was no hearing on 8/20/19. This billing entry
appears to be in error. This billing entry is reduced by 2 hours, or $790.00
based on Dolin’s hourly rate of $395.00.
·
On 10/11/19, 10/15/19, and 10/16/19, Crandall
and Matthew Roberts billed a total of $2,577.50 for preparation and filing of 6
motions on limine. The Court has reviewed all 6 motions, which are generic and
boilerplate, could theoretically apply to any Song-Beverly trial, and do not
particularly discuss or raise any material evidentiary issues in this case for
the court to resolve. The Court finds these billing entries entirely
unreasonable, resulting in a reduction of $2,577.50.
·
On 10/31/19, Roberts billed 2.9 hours for
preparing a case evaluation and analyzing a CCP § 998 offer. Based on the
routine nature of a CCP § 998 offer, this billing is excessive. This billing
entry is reduced by 0.9 hours, or $391.50 based on Robert’s hourly rate
of $435.00.
·
On 10/20/21, Mani Arabi billed 2.8 hours to
conduct research concerning defendant’s failure to appear at a Person Most
Qualified deposition and waiver of objections. This topic does not warrant 2.8
hours of research. This billing entry is reduced by 1.8 hours, or $810.00
based on Arabi’s hourly rate of $450.00.
·
On 6/7/22 and 6/9/22, Dhara Patel billed a total
of 9.8 hours for working on the instant motion. This is a routine fee motion
after settlement of a Song-Beverly case. This billing entry is reduced by 5.3
hours, or $1,775.50 based on Patel’s hourly rate of $335.00.
California
Consumer Attorneys, P.C. - $4,500.00 in reductions
·
On 2/7/20, 6/1/20, 6/2/20, 7/6/20, 11/1/20,
Brian Murray billed a total of 9.9 hours for various tasks, including review of
the client file, review of discovery, development of litigation strategy, and
review of deposition transcripts. This appears duplicative of the work that
co-counsel Strategic Legal Practices, LLP performed. These billing entries are
reduced by a total of 4 hours, or $1,800.00 based on Murray’s hourly
rate of $450.00.
·
On 10/28/20, Murray billed a total of $1,350.00
for drafting motions in limine numbers 7 through 16. These motions were never
filed. The Court finds these billing entries entirely unreasonable, resulting
in a reduction of $1,350.00.
·
On 7/13/21, 7/14/21, and 7/15/21, Murray billed
a total of $2,700.00 for reviewing defendant’s motions in limine and preparing
oppositions. The Court has reviewed all 13 motions and oppositions thereto,
which are generic and boilerplate, could theoretically apply to any
Song-Beverly trial. Although plaintiffs were obligated to oppose the motions, a
reduction of $1,350.00, or 3 hours at Murray’s hourly rate of $450.00,
is appropriate.
All
other billing entries are reasonable. Based on the foregoing, plaintiffs’
request for $113,068.18 in fees is reduced by $16,095.50 ($11,595.50 for
Strategic Legal Practices and $4,500.00 for California Consumer Attorneys,
P.C.), resulting in $96,972.68. The Court adds $2,000.00, as opposed to the
$3,500.00 requested, for additional work on the motion for attorney fees after
the motion was filed. (Shahian Decl. ¶ 78.)
For
the foregoing reasons, the Court award total fees of $98,972.68.
A multiplier is not
warranted. This is a standard lemon law
case that did not present any novel issues. (Weeks v. Baker & McKenzie
(1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1176.)
Although counsel represented plaintiff on a contingency basis, the Court
finds that the lodestar awarded as set forth above sufficiently compensates
counsel for their efforts. (Id.)
Costs sought are awarded as requested
in the sum of $21,126.84.
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 this action is $120,099.52 ($98,972.68 fees
+ $21,126.84 costs). Such fees and costs are awarded to plaintiffs Gerardo
Ruiz and Lupe Ruiz against defendant Kia Motors America Inc.