Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 21STCV16251, Date: 2023-03-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV16251    Hearing Date: March 3, 2023    Dept: 39

Dadson Washer Service, Inc. v. Descanso Artiste, Ltd., et al.

Case No. 21STCV16251

Motion for Attorney’s Fees

            Plaintiff Dadson Washer Service, Inc. (“Dadson” or “Plaintiff”) filed this action against Descanso Artiste, Ltd. (“Descanso” or “Defendant”) on April 29, 2021, asserting causes of action for breach of contract, as well as forcible detainer and conversion.  The case proceeded to trial, and the Court issued a statement of decision finding for Plaintiff, and against Defendant, on each cause of action.  The Court awarded $30,343.21 in damages with prejudgment interest as of the date of the breach (March 21, 2021).  The Court also found that Plaintiff was the prevailing party and therefore entitled to attorney’s fees under the contract.  Plaintiff filed a noticed motion, and Defendant filed an opposition. 

The determination of reasonable amount of attorney fees is within the sound discretion of trial courts. (PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095; Akins v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. (2000) 79 Cal. App. 4th 1127, 1134.)  The burden is on the party seeking attorney fees to prove reasonableness of the fees.  (Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino (2010) 188 Cal. App. 4th 603, 615.)  The Court has broad discretion in determining the amount of a reasonable attorney’s fee award which will not be overturned absent a “manifest abuse of discretion, a prejudicial error of law, or necessary findings not supported by substantial evidence.”  (Bernardi v. County of Monterey (2008) 167 Cal. App. 4th 1379, 1393-94.)  The Court need not explain its calculation of the amount of attorney’s fees awarded in detail; identifying the factors considered in arriving at the amount will suffice. (Ventura v. ABM Industries Inc. (2012) 212 Cal.App.4th 258, 274-75.)

            Plaintiff seeks $11,190 in attorney’s fees based upon 37.3 hours at a billing rate of $300.  The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s counsel’s entries and finds that they are reasonable and necessary to the litigation of this case.  The Court finds that Plaintiff’s counsel’s billing rate is reasonable, given her experience and the prevailing rates in the community.  Simply, attorney’s fees of $11,190 is reasonable for a case of this nature and is commensurate with what the Court would expect.

            Based upon the foregoing, the Court orders as follows:

            1.         Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees is granted.  The Court orders Defendant to pay Plaintiff’s counsel attorney’s fees in the amount of $11,190 forthwith.

            2.         The Court orders Plaintiff’s counsel to prepare and lodge and serve a proposed judgment if necessary on or before March 13, 2023. 

            3.         The Court continues the Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal to March 24, 2023, at 8:30 a.m.  The Court provides notice: If Plaintiff’s counsel does not lodge a proposed judgment and appear at the hearing, absent good cause, the Court will assume that a judgment is not necessary in this case (i.e., Defendant paid all amounts owed) and the Court will dismiss this case with prejudice.

            4.         Plaintiff’s counsel shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.