Judge: Matthew C. Braner, Case: 37-2022-00022061-CU-MC-CTL, Date: 2024-05-24 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - May 23, 2024

05/24/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-60 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Matthew C. Braner

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Misc Complaints - Other Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2022-00022061-CU-MC-CTL CASTANARES VS CITY OF SAN DIEGO [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Plaintiff Arturo Castanares's motion for award of attorney fees is GRANTED in part.

The parties' requests for judicial notice are granted.

Plaintiff prevailed on his action under the California Public Records Act and now brings his motion for fees under Government Code section 7923.115. (See Gov. Code, § 7923.115, subd. (a) ['If the requester prevails in litigation filed pursuant to this chapter, the court shall award court costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the requester.'].) Plaintiff calculates a fee lodestar of $54,202.60; of this amount, $18,000 arises from the purported time spent by attorney Cory Briggs (24 hours) to prepare the fee motion, at a rate of $750/hour. Plaintiff also requests a multiplier of 1.5 and seeks $106.10 in costs.

Defendant City of San Diego concedes Plaintiff is the prevailing party and is entitled to fees and costs; however, Defendant disputes the reasonableness of the $750/hour proposed rate for attorney Briggs, the amount of hours requested in connection with the fee motion, and the request for a multiplier.

Defendant does not dispute the $106.10 in costs. Upon review of the submitted materials, the court agrees that Plaintiff's fee request is unreasonable.

First, consistent with this department's recent decision concerning a reasonable rate for attorney Briggs in CPRA cases, and decisions of other departments of this court, the court finds the proposed rate of $750/hour for attorney Briggs is unreasonable. Instead, the court will use a rate of $650/hour for attorney Briggs in this case to determine Plaintiff's lodestar.

Second, attorney Briggs failed to support his request for 24 hours of attorney time in connection with the fee motion. He attests he spent 10 hours to prepare the opening brief and 10 hours to prepare the reply brief, and estimates four hours to prepare for and attend the hearing on the motion. Notably, attorney Briggs did not provide the contemporaneous time entries for the work spent on the fee motion, as he did for the work performed to secure a judgment in favor of Plaintiff. More importantly, his assertion he spent 10 hours to prepare the opening brief is difficult to accept; the brief, particularly the legal analysis and case citations, is nearly identical to opening briefs filed by attorney Briggs in other CPRA cases in this and other departments of this court. The reply is also substantially a recitation of the same (duplicative) legal analysis presented in the opening brief and briefs filed by attorney Briggs in other cases.

Consequently, the court concludes that 7 hours to prepare and argue the motion is reasonable (1.5 hours for the opening brief, 4 hours for the reply, and 1.5 hours to prepare for and appear at the hearing). The hours expended and proposed rates are otherwise reasonable, which brings the total Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3034564  17 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  CASTANARES VS CITY OF SAN DIEGO [IMAGED]  37-2022-00022061-CU-MC-CTL lodestar to $22,240 (34.2 hours x $650/hour for attorney Briggs) + $13,510 (38.6 hours x $350/hour for attorney Pasin) + $2,292.50 (13.1 hours x $175/hour for paralegal Flores) + 106.10 (costs) = $38,148.60.

Third, the court will not apply a positive multiplier. The lodestar sufficiently fixes the fee at the fair market value inclusive of the factors to be considered for an enhancement. The factors emphasized by Plaintiff are addressed by the relatively high hourly rates for a CPRA case and the fact that an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs to a prevailing plaintiff is mandatory under Government Code section 7923.115.

Finally, the court rejects Plaintiff's counsel's request that awarded fees and costs be paid directly to the Briggs Law Corporation. Plaintiff is the 'requester' who prevailed in this case, and 'the court shall award court costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the requester.' (Gov. Code, § 7923.115, subd. (a).) Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is granted in part. Plaintiff is awarded $38,148.60 in fees and costs.

The minute order is the order of the court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3034564  17