Judge: Joel L. Lofton, Case: 19GDCV01085, Date: 2023-10-30 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 19GDCV01085 Hearing Date: October 30, 2023 Dept: X
Tentative Ruling
Judge Joel L. Lofton,
Department X
HEARING DATE: October 30, 2023 TRIAL
DATE: No date set.
CASE: NICHOLAS GLAROS v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; CALIFORNIA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY
CASE NO.: 19GDCV01085
MOTION
FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
MOVING PARTY: Defendant California Department of
Transportation (“Caltrans”)
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff
Nicholas Glaros
SERVICE: Filed September 5, 2023
OPPOSITION: Filed September 25, 2023
REPLY: Filed October 19, 2023
RELIEF
REQUESTED
Caltrans moves for attorney’s fees
totaling $38,500.
BACKGROUND
This case arises from Plaintiff Nicholas
Glaros’s (“Plaintiff”) attempts to purchase the home he resides in through
Defendant California Department of Transportation’s (“Caltrans”) Affordable
Sales Program (“ASP”). Plaintiff filed a fourth amended complaint on March 16,
2021, alleging one cause of action for breach of contract.
TENTATIVE RULING
Caltrans’
motion for fees totaling $38,500 is GRANTED.
LEGAL STANDARD
“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 section 1717, subd. (a).)
DISCUSSION
Caltrans moves for attorney’s fees totaling $38,500. Judgment was entered against Plaintiff on
January 4, 2022. Plaintiff appealed on March 7, 2022. The appellate court
affirmed the judgment by remittitur on July 25, 2023.
On April 20, 2022, this court granted Caltrans’ previous motion
for attorney’s fees totaling $73,385. The basis of both Caltrans’ previous
motion and the current one is section 19 of the Affordable Sales Program –
Purchase and Sale Agreement (“Agreement”), which provides: “If any legal
action, arbitration or other proceeding is brought involving a dispute between
the parties or arising out of the execution of this Agreement or sale of the
Property, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs and
reasonable attorney’s fees incurred in such action or proceeding, in addition
to any other relief to which such party may be entitled.” (Bowman Decl. ¶ 5,
Exhibit 1 at p. 4.) This court found that Caltrans was the prevailing party
during the previous motion, and Caltrans is still the prevailing party after
appeal.
“Where
a section 1717 fee award is made at the trial level, the
prevailing party may, at the appropriate time, request fees attributable to a
subsequent appeal.” (Butler-Rupp v. Lourdeaux (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th
918, 923.) “ ‘[B]ecause contractually authorized attorney fees are now listed
as costs under Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5,
... they may either be requested of the appellate court while the appeal is
pending, or of the trial court upon issuance of the remittitur.’ ” (Id. at
p. 924.)
Caltrans
seeks fees at a rate of $550 for 70 hours worked by Razmig Khayalian.
(Khayalian Decl. ¶¶ 11-12.) Counsel states that he worked more than 100 hours on
the appeal but is seeking a reduced number of hours. (Id. ¶ 11.)
Caltrans’ lodestar amount of $38,500 is based on a reasonable number of hours
worked and a reasonable rate.
Caltrans’
motion for fees totaling $38,500 is granted.
CONCLUSION
Caltrans’
motion for fees totaling $38,500 is GRANTED.
Moving
Party to give notice.
Dated: October 30,
2023 ___________________________________
Joel
L. Lofton
Judge
of the Superior Court
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an
email to the court indicating their
intention to submit. alhdeptx@lacourt.org