Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 21STLC05254, Date: 2024-02-05 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STLC05254 Hearing Date: February 5, 2024 Dept: 26
Westlake
Services, LLC v. Black Diamond Motors, Inc., et al.
MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
(CCP §§ 1032, 1033.5)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff
Westlake Service, LLC’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,640.00.
ANALYSIS:
On July 19, 2021, Plaintiff Westlake Services, LLC
(“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Black Diamond Motors, Inc. (“Defendant Black Diamond”) and Mayra I. James (“Defendant
James”). The Complaint alleges causes of action for (1) open book account;
(2) account stated; (3) reasonable value; (4) breach of contract; and (5)
breach of guarantee. Defendant James filed an
answer on September 29, 2021. Following no response from Defendant Black
Diamond, the Court entered its default on November 9, 2021.
The case came for trial on September 18, 2023, but there was
no appearance by Defendant James. (Minute Order, 09/18/23.) The Court found in
favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $5,997.08 principal, $3,086.03 interest,
and additional fees. (Ibid.) Plaintiff was ordered to submit a proposed
judgment. (Ibid.)
Plaintiff filed the instant
Motion for Attorney’s Fees on November 28, 2023 and a proposed judgment the
next day. No opposition to the Motion has been filed.
Discussion
Entitlement to Attorney’s Fees
Plaintiff brought the instant Motion pursuant
to Code of Civil Procedure section 1032 and 1033.5. A prevailing party is
entitled to recover costs, including attorneys’ fees when authorized by
contract, statute, or law. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (a)(4); § 1033.5,
subd. (a)(10).) A motion for attorney’s fees must be filed and served with the
time for filing a notice of appeal under Cal. Rules of Court Rule 8.822. (Cal.
Rules of Court Rule 3.1702(a).) Cal. Rules of Court Rule 8.822 states that an
attorneys’ fees motion must be filed within either (1) 30 days after the trial
court clerk served the party filing the motion with notice of entry of
judgment; or (2) 90 days after entry of judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court
8.822(1).) Here, the Motion is timely because judgment has yet to be entered.
It is undisputed that Plaintiff is the
prevailing party in this action, as the party in whose favor the Court ruled on
a trial. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (a)(4).) Accordingly, Plaintiff is
entitled to recover its costs under Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5,
subdivision (a). Those costs include reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to the
parties’ contract. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (a)(10)(A).) The contract,
specifically the personal guarantee signed by Defendant James, provides “Guarantor
agrees to pay all of Westlake’s costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys’ fees
incurred in enforcing the obligations, covenants and agreements of Dealer in
the Dealer Agreement and other agreements between Westlake and Dealer or
incurred by Westlake in enforcing this Guarantee.” (Motion, Anderson Decl., Exh. 2, ¶3.) Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled
to an award of the reasonable attorney’s fees it incurred.
Amount of Attorney’s Fees
Plaintiff moves for an award of $8,545.00
in attorney’s fees based on 16.6 hours
of attorney time billed between $500.00 to $600.00 per hour. (Motion, Anderson
Decl., Exh. 3, p. 5.) The moving party bears the burden of proof with respect
to attorney’s fees. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (c)(5)(A).) Specifically,
a party seeking fees has the burden of showing the fees incurred are “allowable,”
are “reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation,” and are “reasonable
in amount.” (Levy v. Toyota Motor
Sales, U.S.A., Inc. (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 807, 816.)
The Court’s objective is to award attorney’s 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.)
The Motion, however,
does not demonstrate that the hourly rate or number of hours billed is
reasonable. (Motion, pp. 3:21-4:3.) It simply attaches Plaintiff’s counsel’s
billing records without any analysis or citation to authority. (Id. at
Exh. 3.) The Court has no insight into “the extent to which the nature
of the litigation precluded other employment by the attorneys” or “the
contingent nature of the fee award.” The Court can find that the case did not
present novel or difficult questions; it was a straightforward contract case
that involved little to no opposition from Defendants. The skill displayed by
Plaintiff’s counsel in litigating the action was moderate. Given the discovery
motions, ex parte applications, and preparation for trial, the Court finds it
was reasonable that 16.6 hours of attorney time was billed. As no information
is provided regarding whether $500.00 to $600.00 per hour is the prevailing
rate in the community for similar work, the Court exercises its judgment in
determining that those rates are too high for an uncomplicated contract action
in the limited jurisdiction court. The hourly rate is reduced to $400.00.
Accordingly, the lodestar amount is $6,640.00.
Conclusion
Plaintiff
Westlake Service, LLC’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,640.00.
Moving
party to give notice.