Judge: Keri G. Katz, Case: 37-2022-00036952-CL-OR-CTL, Date: 2024-01-26 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - January 25, 2024

01/26/2024  08:25:00 AM  C-74 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Keri Katz

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Limited  Other Real Property Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2022-00036952-CL-OR-CTL SAN DIEGO COUNTRY ESTATES ASSOCIATION VS FRYE [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

The court rules as follows on Plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees and costs.

Following entry of default against Defendant Allen Frye, the court finds Plaintiff establishes that Plaintiff is the prevailing party for purposes of the award of attorneys' fees and costs under CCP § 1032 and § 1033.5 and CC § 1717(a) and § 5975(c).

As to the amount of fees, PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084 sets forth the applicable analysis.

[T]he fee setting inquiry in California ordinarily begins with the 'lodestar,' i.e., the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate. 'California courts have consistently held that a computation of time spent on a case and the reasonable value of that time is fundamental to a determination of an appropriate attorneys' fee award.' (Margolin v. Regional Planning Com. (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 999, 1004-1005 [185 Cal.Rptr. 145].) The reasonable hourly rate is that prevailing in the community for similar work. (Id. at p. 1004; Shaffer v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 993, 1002 [39 Cal.Rptr.2d 506].) The lodestar figure may then be adjusted, based on consideration of factors specific to the case, in order to fix the fee at the fair market value for the legal services provided.

(Serrano v. Priest, supra, 20 Cal.3d at p. 49.) PLCM Group, 22 Cal.4th at 1095. These factors include ' ' the nature of the litigation, its difficulty, the amount involved, the skill required in its handling, the skill employed, the attention given, the success or failure, and other circumstances in the case.' ' PLCM Group, 22 Cal.4th at 1096 citing Melnyk v. Robledo (1976) 64 Cal.App.3d 618, 623-624.

The court finds the hourly rates charged by Plaintiff's attorneys reasonable. Based on the evidence and authorities Plaintiff submits, and based on the court's own experience, the court finds the rates charged are commensurate with counsel's skill and experience and within the range of market rates charged by attorneys of equivalent experience, skill and expertise in San Diego. PLCM Group, 22 Cal.4th at 1095 ['[t]he reasonable hourly rate is that prevailing in the community for similar work']. Based on the factors set forth above and the court's own experience, and absent any opposition from Defendant, the court also finds the hours spent by Plaintiff's attorneys reasonable. Accordingly, the court exercises its discretion in favor of a finding of attorneys' fees of $11,737.50 as reasonable.

Plaintiff also seeks $1,697.67 in costs. Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Default contains verified costs of Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3017140 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  SAN DIEGO COUNTRY ESTATES ASSOCIATION VS FRYE [IMAGED]  37-2022-00036952-CL-OR-CTL $1,462.63 [ROA 9]. However, there is no evidence before the court as to the costs Plaintiff seeks over and above $1,462.63. The court will hear from Plaintiff on the issue of costs.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3017140