Judge: Randall J. Sherman, Case: 2017-00917542, Date: 2022-09-30 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff-Intervenor Rhiannon Aller’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs is granted.  The court awards Intervenor Rhiannon Aller $168,093.33 as reasonable attorneys’ fees and $26,373.10 as costs of suit against defendant Anaheim Arena Management, LLC.  Aller’s first Request for Judicial Notice is granted.  Aller’s second Request for Judicial Notice is denied as untimely.

The court concludes that Aller has established all the required criteria of CCP §1021.5, the private attorney general doctrine.  Aller’s efforts resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest, a significant benefit was conferred on a large class of persons, the necessity and financial burden of private enforcement were such as to make the award appropriate, and such fees and costs should not in the interest of justice be paid out of the recovery by the class.

The gross settlement amount in this case increased from $1,750,000 to $2,254,280 only after Aller intervened and opposed the original settlement amount.  Since motions for settlement approval are routinely granted without the gross settlement amount increasing, this court can only conclude that the increase, in both the gross settlement amount and the number of class members (from 5130 to 6040) was due to Aller’s opposition to the original settlement.  Plaintiff Amaro did not ask for any increase in attorneys’ fees due to the higher gross settlement amount, and was awarded 1/3 of the original settlement amount of $1,750,000.  Since Aller’s efforts resulted in a higher gross settlement amount of $504,280, the court in its discretion concludes that 1/3 of that increment is a reasonable attorney fee.  Aller asks for over $1.4 million in fees, but this court believes it would be absurd to award fees in a greater amount than those that would be awarded if Aller was the one who was the settling plaintiff.  Aller also has shown that she incurred class-related costs of $26,373.10, which are normally recovered as part of class action settlements, making the award appropriate in the court’s view.

The elements of CCP §1021.5 are satisfied because 6040 class members (and even the 910 new class members) constitute a large class of persons.  (Doing the math shows that the increase in the GSA by $504,280 while adding 910 class members works out to an average of about $554 per person.  Since the final average recovery was only about $250 per person, the new settlement money caused the original settlement class members’ average payments to increase.)  In addition, the necessity and financial burden of pursuing wage and hour violations by class or PAGA actions rather than by individual actions is apparent, and the interests of justice require that the class members not be approached to pay the fee award, which also as a practical matter would be expensive and virtually unworkable.  Rather, the interests of justice require that defendant pay for these fees and costs.  Defendant settled a lawsuit filed in 2017 rather than one filed in 2014.  This court is well aware that multiple class and PAGA actions sometimes get filed against the same defendant, and that sometimes staying the later-filed cases is appropriate.  If a defendant wants to settle with the lowest bidder, who is the plaintiff in a later-filed case, they have every right to, but defendant assumes the risk of an objection that could result in defendant having to pay a higher settlement amount, which is exactly what happened here.  Defendant must pay the statutorily-authorized price for choosing to settle with the party and on the terms that it did.

Aller is ordered to give notice of the ruling unless notice is waived.