Judge: Michael P. Linfield, Case: 21STCV29064, Date: 2023-02-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV29064    Hearing Date: February 23, 2023    Dept: 34

SUBJECT:         Motion for Attorney’s Fees

 

Moving Party:  Plaintiff Eric Young

Resp. Party:    Defendant Precious Young

                                     

 

       

Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is GRANTED. Attorney’s fees are AWARDED for Plaintiff Eric Young and against Defendant Precious Young in the amount of $44,625.00.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

On August 6, 2021, Plaintiffs Eric Young and Paula Young filed their Verified Complaint against Precious Young on causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty, elder abuse, quiet title, and constructive trust.

 

On December 22, 2021, the Court sustained Defendant’s Demurrer as to the fourth cause of action for constructive trust.

 

On December 29, 2021, Defendant/Cross-Complainant Precious Young filed her Verified Cross Complaint against Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Eric Young and Paula Young.

 

On December 6, 2022, the Jury found the following after Trial: (1) that Plaintiff Eric Young proved his claim against Defendant Precious Young for elder abuse, awarding damages of $0.00; (2) that Cross-Complainant Precious Young did not prove her claim against Cross-Defendant Eric Young for fraud; and (3) that there was clear and convincing evidence that Defendant/Cross-Complainant Precious Young acted with malice, oppression, or fraud. Pursuant to his oral request, the Court dismissed Plaintiff Eric Young’s claim for punitive damages.

 

On January 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Attorney’s Fees.

 

On February 9, 2023, Defendant filed her Opposition.

 

On February 17, 2023, Plaintiffs filed their Reply.

 

 

ANALYSIS:

 

 

I.           Legal Standard

 

“Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (b).)¿¿ 

 

“‘Prevailing party’ includes the party with a net monetary recovery, a defendant in whose favor a dismissal is entered, a defendant where neither plaintiff nor defendant obtains any relief, and a defendant as against those plaintiffs who do not recover any relief against that defendant. If any party recovers other than monetary relief and in situations other than as specified, the ‘prevailing party’ shall be as determined by the court, and under those circumstances, the court, in its discretion, may allow costs or not and, if allowed, may apportion costs between the parties on the same or adverse sides pursuant to rules adopted under Section 1034.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (a)(4).)¿¿ 

 

Attorneys’ fees are allowed as costs when authorized by contract, statute, or law. (Code Civ. Proc, § 1033.5, subd. (a)(10)(B).)¿¿¿ 

 

“Where it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that a defendant is liable for physical abuse as defined in Section 15610.63, neglect as defined in Section 15610.57, or abandonment as defined in Section 15610.05, and that the defendant has been guilty of recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice in the commission of this abuse, the following shall apply, in addition to all other remedies otherwise provided by law:

 

“(a) The court shall award to the plaintiff reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. The term “costs” includes, but is not limited to, reasonable fees for the services of a conservator, if any, devoted to the litigation of a claim brought under this article.”

 

(Welf. & Inst. Code, § 15657, subd. (a).)

 

II.        Discussion

 

Plaintiff Eric Young moves the Court to award him $45,843.50 in attorney’s fees. (Motion, p. 9:10–11.) Plaintiff argues that he is entitled to his reasonable attorney’s fees expended in prosecuting his claims for financial elder abuse. (Id. at p. 6:21–23.)

 

Defendant opposes the Motion, arguing that the Court should deny the Motion or reduce any award because of the excessive time spent and the hourly rate charged. (Opposition, pp. 2:14–15.) Defendant claims many of the hours could have been done by staff and points to the demurrer and motion for summary judgment hearings as areas where excessive fees have been charged. (Id. at pp. 3–5.)

 

In his Reply, Plaintiff argues that the attorney’s fees charged are reasonable, that almost all of the pretrial fees were to oppose Defendant’s frivolous actions and tactics, and that Defendant and Defense Counsel had been repeatedly warned about the cause of action for elder abuse. (Reply, pp. 2:1–2, 3:1–2, 4:1–2.)

 

There is no question that Plaintiff is the prevailing party.  The jury found that Defendant Precious Young was liable for elder abuse.  During the court trial on the quiet title cause of action, the Court quieted title with Plaintiff and found that Defendant Precious Young acted out of pure greed.  The Court also found it telling that, despite the fact that his daughter tried to take his house, Plaintiff Eric Young did not pursue his claim for punitive damages against Precious Young, and in fact stated that he wished his house to go to both his daughter, Precious Young, and his son upon his death.

 

Pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657, subdivision (a), Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs.

 

The Court finds that Plaintiff’s Counsel’s hourly rate of $425.00 per hour is reasonable. However, the Court agrees with Defendant that some of the 129.5 hours claimed appear to be excessive. The Court will award attorney’s fees for 105 hours at a rate of $425.00 per hour.

 

The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees. The Court awards attorney’s fees for Plaintiff Eric Young and against Defendant Precious Young in the amount of $44,625.00.

 

III.     Conclusion

 

Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is GRANTED. Attorney’s fees are AWARDED for Plaintiff Eric Young and against Defendant Precious Young in the amount of $44,625.00.