Judge Lynne M. Hobbs, Case Number: 23STCV12157, Date: 2024-07-11 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 23STCV12157, Date: 2024-07-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV12157 Hearing Date: July 11, 2024 Dept: 61

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., A NATIONAL BANKING ASSOCIATION vs YADI WAKEBEIER, et al.

TENTATIVE

Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s Motion for Order Discharging Interpleader Plaintiff-Stakeholder from Liability is GRANTED. Plaintiff is to deposit the interpleaded funds with the court, deducting $11,486.32 for attorney fees and $2,332.62 in costs.

Moving party to give notice.

DISCUSSION

"Any person, firm, corporation, association or other entity against whom double or multiple claims are made, or may be made, by two or more persons which are such that they may give rise to double or multiple liability, may bring an action against the claimants to compel them to interplead and litigate their several claims.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 386, subd. (b).)

An interpleader action is an equitable proceeding. In an interpleader action, the court initially determines the right of the plaintiff to interplead the funds; if that right is sustained, an interlocutory decree is entered which requires the defendants to interplead and litigate their claims to the funds. Upon an admission of liability and deposit of monies with the court, the plaintiff then may be discharged from liability and dismissed from the interpleader action. [Citations.] The effect of such an order is to preserve the fund, discharge the stakeholder from further liability, and to keep the fund in the court's custody until the rights of the potential claimants of the monies can be adjudicated. By implementing an interpleader action and obtaining a discharge from further liability, the stakeholder avoids tort liability. (Virtanen v. O'Connell (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 688, 698, internal citations and quotation marks omitted.)

“After any such complaint or cross-complaint in interpleader has been filed, the court in which it is filed may enter its order restraining all parties to the action from instituting or further prosecuting any other proceeding in any court in this state affecting the rights and obligations as between the parties to the interpleader until further order of the court.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 386, subd. (f).)

Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Plaintiff) seeks an order directing it to deposit the $50,068.74 in wire funds held by it, which are contested by Defendants Ann and Calvin Rea and Defendant Yadi Wakebeier (Defendants), to the court. Plaintiff also seeks concurrent orders that upon this deposit, Plaintiff shall be discharged from all liability in this action with regard to the money deposited, and Defendants shall be restrained from prosecuting any action against Plaintiff relating to their rights in this action, and a judgment of dismissal shall enter against Plaintiff. (Motion at p. 2.) Plaintiff claims no interest in the proceeds. (Motion at p. 5.)

As a mere stakeholder in the funds, ready to release them to whichever party is legally entitled to obtain them, Plaintiff is entitled to interplead the funds and obtain a discharge of liability related thereto. (Code Civ. Proc. § 386, subd. (f).) No party has filed an opposition to Plaintiff’s motion.

Plaintiff seeks costs and attorney fees incurred in this action to be taken from the interpleaded amount, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 386.6, subd. (a). (Motion at pp. 8–10.) The amount of funds to be deducted is $14,692.24, representing $12,345.92 in attorney fees and $2,346.32 in costs.(Rapkine Decl. ¶¶ 4–5.) The fees were incurred by attorneys Mark T. Flewelling and Michael Rapkine at respectively $338 and $322 per hour, and paralegals Kaila M. Bradley and Shant Jaltorossian at respectively $228 and $172 per hour. (Rapkine Decl. ¶ 2.) The invoices associated with these fees and costs are included with the motion. (Rapkine Decl. Exh. A.) From this amount, $859.60 is properly deducted from the request for fees, as they fees are sought in connection with the filing of Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, which was rejected by the court after the filing of the Rea Defendants’ answer, and which Plaintiff thereafter did not attempt to renew. (Rapkine Decl. Exh. A.) It is further appropriate to deduct $13.70 from the costs sought, which are associated with the filing of this rejected FAC. (Ibid.) This leaves a total fee request of $11,486.32, and a total costs request of $2,332.62, for a total award of $13,818.94.

The motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is to deposit the interpleaded funds with the court, deducting $11,486.32 for attorney fees and $2,332.62 in costs.