Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 21PSCV00036, Date: 2023-10-23 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, counsel are advised to check this website periodically to determine whether any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling. Counsel may submit on a tentative ruling by calling the clerk in Department G at (909) 802-1104 prior to 8:30 a.m. the morning of the hearing.

Case Number: 21PSCV00036    Hearing Date: October 23, 2023    Dept: G

Plaintiff Pacific Western Bank’s Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Pacific Western Bank’s Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

This is a breach of contract action arising from a loan agreement. On April 19, 2016, Plaintiff Pacific Western Bank agreed to loan $22,000 to Defendant Howard Gordon Schlick with a maturity date of April 19, 2017, according to a promissory note and business loan agreement executed by Schlick. Subsequently, the principal loan amount was increased to $200,000, the maturity date was extended to July 19, 2019, and Defendants William and Howard Schlick, trustees of The 2003 Jeanne M. Schlick Irrevocable Trust U/D/T Dated March 13, 2003 (Schlick Trustees), were added to the loan agreement as co-borrowers.

Pacific Western Bank alleges Schlick and the Schlick Trustees (collectively, Defendants) defaulted on the loan agreement after failing to make payment in full by July 19, 2019. On August 9, Pacific Western Bank sent a letter to Defendants advising them that they were in default and requesting payment in full by August 23. After receiving no payment, Pacific Western Bank sent Defendants a second letter on January 9, 2020 that requested payment in full no later than November 9. Pacific Western Bank alleges they still did not receive full payment of the loan.

On January 14, 2021, Pacific Western Bank filed a complaint against Defendants and Does 1-100, alleging the following causes of action: (1) breach of contract, (2) account stated, (3) money lent, and (4) unjust enrichment.

On March 22, 2023, Pacific Western Bank filed a motion for summary adjudication. On June 8, the court granted their motion and entered judgment against Defendants.

On July 12, 2023, Pacific Western Bank filed the present motion. A hearing on the motion is set for October 23.

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

Pacific Western Bank’s request for judicial notice of the judgment entered in this action is GRANTED.

ANALYSIS

Pacific Western Bank moves for the award of $9,525 in attorney fees. For the following reasons, the court GRANTS their motion.

Legal Standard

“Except as attorney’s fees are specifically provided for by statute, the measure and mode of compensation of attorneys and counselors at law is left to the agreement, express or implied, of the parties; but parties to actions or proceedings are entitled to their costs . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1021.)¿ The prevailing party on a contract, which specifically provides for attorney fees and costs incurred to enforce the agreement, is entitled to reasonable attorney fees in addition to other costs.¿ (Civ. Code, § 1717, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1032, 1033.5, subd. (a)(10)(A).)¿ The court, upon notice and motion by a party, shall determine the prevailing party and shall fix, as an element of the costs of suit, the reasonable attorney fees.¿ (Civ. Code, § 1717, subd. (a), (b).)

“The amount to be awarded to a party as attorney fees is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial judge.” (Contractors Labor Pool, Inc. v. Westway Contractors, Inc. (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 152, 168.) In determining the reasonableness of an attorney fees award, the court considers “the nature, difficulty, intricacy and importance of the litigation, the amount involved, the skill required and success of the attorney's efforts, his or her learning, age and experience, and the time consumed.” (Id., at p. 169.)

Discussion

In this case, the initial promissory note and business loan agreement both allow for the award of attorney fees. (Parrish Decl., Ex. 1, p. 3; Ex. 2, p. 5.) The court also finds Pacific Western Bank is the prevailing party as they successfully obtained summary adjudication of their breach of contract claim against Defendants and dismissed the remaining causes of action. Thus, the court now considers whether their requested award of attorney fees is reasonable.

Here, Pacific Western Bank’s counsel charged $1,000 in fixed fees and $8,525 for thirty-one hours of work at $275 an hour. Utilizing the lodestar approach and based upon the totality of the circumstances, the court finds this amount of attorney fees reasonable and GRANTS Pacific Western Bank’s motion.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Pacific Western Bank’s motion for award of attorney fees is GRANTED.