Judge Lisa K. Sepe-Wiesenfeld, Case Number: SC126852, Date: 2023-09-20 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lisa K. Sepe-Wiesenfeld, Case: SC126852, Date: 2023-09-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: SC126852 Hearing Date: September 20, 2023 Dept: N

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Cyrus Hekmat’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs is GRANTED in the amount of $484,803.25.

Plaintiff Cyrus Hekmat to give notice.

REASONING

This matter went to trial in February 2023. On February 17, 2023, the jury returned a verdict in Plaintiff Cyrus Hekmat (“Plaintiff”)’s favor. Plaintiff now moves the Court for an order awarding him $562,245.85 in attorney fees against Defendant Jonathan Mahboubi (“Defendant”) on the ground that Plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees pursuant to Penal Code section 496, subdivision (c), because the jury found Defendant liable to Plaintiff for theft by false pretenses. Defendant has not filed an opposition to the motion.

Penal Code section 496, subdivision (c), provides that “[a]ny person who has been injured by a violation of subdivision (a) or (b),” the statutory provisions making theft unlawful, “may bring an action for three times the amount of actual damages, if any, sustained by the plaintiff, costs of suit, and reasonable attorney’s fees.” The jury’s verdict made clear that Defendant had deceived Plaintiff by false pretenses, Defendant had taken $1,862,388.89 from Plaintiff based on Plaintiff’s reliance of false pretenses, and Plaintiff had been damaged in that amount. It follows that Plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees here.

The fee setting inquiry in California ordinarily “begins with the ‘lodestar’ [method], i.e., the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate.” (Graciano v. Robinson Ford Sales, Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 140, 154.) “[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. Reg’l Planning Comm’n (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 999, 1004.)

The Court has reviewed the billing sheets provided by Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel and finds that Plaintiff is entitled to recover the full amount of fees sought as to the pretrial and trial preparation. This action required litigation of several pretrial motions, including those arising out of Defendant’s dismissed cross-claims, and Plaintiff’s claim for theft by false pretenses was intertwined with Plaintiff’s other claims for breach of contract and fraud, as well as Defendant’s dismissed cross-claims. The parties engaged in discovery, dispositive motions, trial preparation, pretrial hearings, and a seven-day trial, such that 1,022.4 hours of attorney work is a reasonable number of hours spent preparing the action and trying the case. Further, Plaintiff’s hourly rates ranging from $395 to $600 per hour are reasonable given the skill needed to successfully litigate an action to the result obtained here.

However, the Court reduces Plaintiff’s fees as to the present motion, as the Court finds that 38.8 hours is more than the necessary amount of time required to successfully prepare and attend the hearing for an attorney fees motion, particularly where the motion is unopposed. Plaintiff seeks $17,538.35 in fees for preparing this motion alone, but the Court finds that 10 hours spent preparing the motion at the rate of $400 per hour, plus one hour attending the hearing on the motion at the rate of $400 per hour, is more reasonable. Accordingly, Plaintiff Cyrus Hekmat’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $484,803.25, which consists of $479,803.25 for pretrial and trial fees and $5,000 for fees incurred in preparing the present motion and attending the hearing for the same.