Judge: Mark H. Epstein, Case: 22SMCV01562, Date: 2023-10-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22SMCV01562    Hearing Date: December 19, 2023    Dept: I

The court will inquire whether plaintiff would like to continue the matter to allow for a reply to the untimely opposition.  The court has, in its discretion, reviewed the opposition and found that there appears to be at least some merit to it.  It does appear that $6592.50 was included in error either due to double entries or for time related to appellate work.  As to whether two attorneys were needed for the trial, had the rates been the rates of two lead counsel the court would agree with the defense.  But attorney Yates was there as second-chair and his hourly rate so reflects.  The court is generally inclined not to second-guess the decision to have two counsel present where the second counsel was billing at the lower rate.  The court would, however, inquire as to whether the bills had all been issued without discount and paid in full.  If so, that is some evidence of reasonableness (other than the $6592.50).