Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 22STCV09356, Date: 2024-09-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV09356    Hearing Date: September 12, 2024    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: September 12, 2024

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion for Attorney’s Fees;

Motion to Tax Costs

T/R:      PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES IS GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,941.50.

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TAX COSTS IS DENIED.

PLAINTIFF TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at SMCdept54@lacourt.org with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

BACKGROUND

This is a lemon law action arising out of Plaintiff’s purchase of 2020 Kia Forte manufactured and distributed by Defendant Kia America, Inc.

ANALYSIS

A. Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees

The Song-Beverly Act provides, “[i]f the buyer prevails in an action under this section, the buyer shall be allowed by the court to recover as part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses, including attorney's fees based on actual time expended, determined by the court to have been reasonably incurred by the buyer in connection with the commencement and prosecution of such action.” (Civ. Code § 1794(d).)

Plaintiff asserts that Consumer Law Experts, PC incurred $68,941.50 in fees to prosecute this action, including $3,000.00 in anticipated fees to respond to Defendant’s opposition to the motion and attend the hearing.

Plaintiff’s counsel charges between $424 and $510.00 per hour and spent 157.50 hours on this case over approximately two years. Defendant argues that counsel’s hours are unreasonable, and counsel’s hourly rates are excessive. The Court does not take issue with counsel’s hourly rates. The Court also does not find counsel’s billing entries excessive. The Court has reviewed the billing entries cited by Defendant; none are so egregious to warrant being reduced. This action lasted two years and included extensive discovery, motion work, and trial preparation. The Court finds counsel’s fees reasonable.

The Court finds no basis for the 1.5 multiplier requested by Plaintiff. The case did not require unusual skill, expertise, risk or time commitment.

Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees is GRANTED in the amount of $68,991.50.

B. Defendant’s Motion to Tax Costs

Civil Code §1794(d) provides that a buyer who prevails in an action under that section, “shall be allowed by the court to recover as a part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees based on actual time expended, determined by the court to have been reasonably incurred by the buyer in connection with the commencement and the prosecution of such action.” 

“Section 1794, subdivision (d), permits the prevailing buyer to recover both ‘costs’ and ‘expenses.’” (Jensen v. BMW of North America (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 112, 137.) “[I]t is clear the Legislature intended the word ‘expenses’ to cover items not included in the detailed statutory definition of ‘costs.’” (Id.) Jensen v. BMW of North America expressly states that the costs provision under the Song-Beverly Act is meant to include recovery beyond those codified in C.C.P. §1033.5. (Id.)

Defendant moves to tax certain filing and motion fees, deposition costs, service of process costs, expert witness fees, and court reporter fees from Plaintiff’s memorandum of costs on the ground that they were not reasonably necessary for litigation. The fees cited by Defendant are all standard costs incurred to litigate lemon law actions; the Song-Beverly Act allows for their recovery.

Defendant’s motion is DENIED.