Judge Mark E. Windham, Case Number: 18STCP01796, Date: 2023-11-27 Tentative Ruling

If you desire to submit on the tentative ruling, you may do so by e-mailing Dept. 26 at the Spring Street Courthouse until the morning of the motion hearing.

The e-mail address is SSCdept26@lacourt.org

The heading on your e-mail should contain the case name, number, hearing date, and that you submit. The message should indicate your name, contact information, and the party you represent. Please note, the above e-mail address is to inform the court of your submission on the tentative ruling. All other inquiries will not receive a response.

If there are no appearances by either side and no submission on the Court's tentative ruling, the matter will be placed OFF CALENDAR.

Due to overcrowding concerns of COVID-19, all parties shall make every effort to schedule a remote appearance via LACourtConnect (https://my.lacourt.org/laccwelcome) for their next hearing. The parties shall register with LACourtConnect at least 2 hours prior to their scheduled hearing time.

Rancho Bella Vista HOA v. Espinosa, et al.

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS

Rancho Bella Vista Homeowners Association’s Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees and Costs is GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,612.50 ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND $103.35 COSTS.

On July 11, 2011, the Apache Junction Justice Court in the State of Arizona entered judgment in favor of Rancho Bella Vista Homeowners Association (“Judgment Creditor”) and against Amelia Roberta Espinosa and John Doe Espinosa (“Judgment Debtors”). Pursuant to the Application for Entry of Sister State Judgment filed in this Court on July 11, 2018, this Court entered judgment against Judgment Debtors in the amount of $6,021.29 on the same date.

On February 26, 2020, the Court granted Judgment Creditor’s first motion for attorney’s fees and costs. (Minute Order, 02/26/20.) On September 29, 2021, the Court granted Judgment Creditor’s second Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees and Costs.

Judgment Creditor filed the third and instant Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs (the “Motion”) on August 28, 2023. No opposition to the Motion has been filed to date.

The Motion is accompanied by a request for judicial notice of the (1) Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Basements for Rancho Bella Vista recorded in the Pinal County, Arizona Recorder's Office on July 23, 2003 as Instrument No. 2003-050173; (2) Judgment entered in the Apache Junction Justice Court, County of Maricopa, State of Arizona, entitled Rancho Bella Vista Homeowners Association v. Amelia Roberta Espinosa and John Doe Espinosa with case number CV2G11-G264; and (3) Judgment on Sister-State Judgment entered in the above-entitled action, in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, case number 18STCP01796. The request for judicial notice is granted pursuant to California Evidence Code section 452, subdivisions (c)-(d).

“The judgment creditor may claim under this section the following costs of enforcing a judgment: . . . (6) Attorney's fees, if allowed by Section 685.040.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 685.070, subd. (a).) Code of Civil Procedure, section 685.040 states: “The judgment creditor is entitled to the reasonable and necessary costs of enforcing a judgment. Attorney’s fees incurred in enforcing a judgment are not included in costs collectible under this title unless otherwise provided by law. Attorney’s fees incurred in enforcing a judgment are included as costs collectible under this title if the underlying judgment includes an award of attorney’s fees to the judgment creditor pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) of Section 1033.5.” Also, the motion must be brought within two years of the incurred costs. (Code Civ. Proc., § 685.080, subd. (a).)

As the Court previously found on the first two motions for attorney’s fees and costs, Judgment Creditor is entitled to attorney’s fees incurred enforcing its judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 685.040 based on the award of attorney’s fees in the underlying sister-state judgment. (Motion, RJN, Exh. 2.) The Motion is timely filed with respect to fees incurred between September 28, 2021 and August 23, 2023. (Motion, Baillio Decl., ¶¶7-8.)

The Court’s objective is to award attorney fees at the fair market value based on the particular action. (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1132.) “The reasonable hourly rate is that prevailing in the community for similar work.” (PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095.) “‘[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 . . . .’” (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1134.) The lodestar method is based on the factors, as relevant to the particular case: “(1) the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, (2) the skill displayed in presenting them, (3) the extent to which the nature of the litigation precluded other employment by the attorneys, (4) the contingent nature of the fee award.” (Id. at 1132.) “The ‘‘experienced trial judge is the best judge of the value of professional services rendered in his court, and while his judgment is of course subject to review, it will not be disturbed unless the appellate court is convinced that it is clearly wrong.’’” (Id.) A negative modifier was appropriate when duplicative work had been performed. (Thayer v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 819.)

Judgment Creditor submits the declaration of its attorney, Austin Baillio (“Baillio”) with an itemization of work performed, in support of its request for attorney’s fees. (Motion, Baillio Decl. and Exh. A.) Baillio declares he billed 2.3 hours of attorney time on collection efforts and the drafting of the instant Motion. (Id. at ¶¶7, 14 and Exh. A.) Baillio also billed two flat fees of $275.00 for the notices of satisfaction of judgment in Arizona and California. (Id. at ¶7 and Exh. A.) Finally, four paralegals billing at $150.00 to $1750.00 per hour spent 1.5 hours on this action during the same time frame. (Id. at ¶¶8-11 and Exh. A.) The total amount of attorney’s fees Judgment Creditor contends it incurred, therefore, is $1,612.50. (Id. at ¶¶7-14 and Exh. A.) The Court finds these fees are reasonable based on the continuing post-judgment enforcement efforts undertaken by Judgment Creditor and the hourly rates charged.

Plaintiff also incurred costs from investigation, filing fees, appearance fees, and other costs in the amount of $309.85. (Id. at Exh. A.) The Court finds the costs should be reduced under Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, pursuant to the Court’s discretion under subdivision (c)(4) with respect to costs not expressly allowed for “annual electronic service fee,” “background investigation,” and “file management software provider charge.” (Ibid.) Accordingly, Judgment Creditor is awarded costs of $103.35.

Rancho Bella Vista Homeowners Association’s Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees and Costs is GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,612.50 ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND $103.35 COSTS.