Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 20STCV16493, Date: 2022-09-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV16493    Hearing Date: September 2, 2022    Dept: 48

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On July 6, 2022, Plaintiff Victor F. Lopez filed a notice that he had accepted Defendant Ford Motor Company’s section 998 offer in this Song-Beverly case.  Under the settlement, Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney fees and costs.  On July 12, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney fees, costs, and expenses.  Defendant did not file an opposition.

Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice is denied, as attorney fees orders in other cases are not relevant.

As the prevailing party, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees.  (Civ. Code, § 1794, subd. (d).)  California courts apply the “lodestar” approach to determine what fees are reasonable.  (See, e.g., Holguin v. DISH Network LLC (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 1310, 1332.)  This inquiry “begins with the ‘lodestar,’ i.e., the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate.”  (PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095.)  From there, the “lodestar figure may then be adjusted, based on consideration of factors specific to the case, in order to fix the fee at the fair market value for the legal services provided.”  (Ibid.)  Relevant factors include “(1) the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, (2) the skill displayed in presenting them, (3) the extent to which the nature of the litigation precluded other employment by the attorneys, [and] (4) the contingent nature of the fee award.”  (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1132.)  The party seeking fees has the burden of documenting the appropriate hours expended and hourly rates.  (City of Colton v. Singletary (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 751, 784.)

Plaintiff seeks $74,447.00 in attorney fees, $26,056.45 as a lodestar enhancement, $4,771.35 in costs and expenses, and an additional $3,500.00 in attorney fees in connection with this motion, totaling $ 108,774.80.

Plaintiff’s counsel charge various hourly rates: $525 for Alisa Adams; $425 for Daniel Law; $375, $395, and $410 for Debora Rabieian; $360 and $390 for Esther Kim; $385 for Ezra Ryu; $395 for Gregory Sogoyan; $550 for Gregory Yu; $390 and $410 for Kareem Aref; $450 for Mani Arabi; $450 for Mark Gibson; $350 and $375 for Nadine Aslaadi; $460 for Neal Butala; $425, $450, and $550 for Tionna Dolin; and $285 for law clerk Kris Coombs, Jr.  (Shahian Decl. ¶¶ 37-64.)  These rates are reasonable for experienced attorneys in Los Angeles specializing in these types of cases.

Plaintiff’s billing records reflect 185.3 hours billed, for a total of $74,447.00 in fees.  (Shahian Decl., Ex. 30.)  The billing records reflect some inefficiencies.  This case was one of many brought by Plaintiff’s counsel against Defendant alleging similar defects.  The Court has seen some of these actions.  The complaints, oppositions to demurrers and motions for judgment on the pleadings, motions in limine, and fee motions are similar across the cases brought by Plaintiff’s counsel.  Therefore, less time is needed to draft these documents.  Having reviewed and considered the billing records, the Court reduces the attorney fees by $7,444.70.

Plaintiff requests $3,500.00 for reviewing Defendant’s opposition, preparing a reply, and attending the hearing on the motion.  (Shahian Decl. ¶ 67.)  Because the motion is unopposed, the Court will not award this additional amount.

Plaintiff requests a lodestar multiplier of 1.35 ($26,056.45).  (Motion at pp. 3, 12.)  This matter did not involve complex or novel legal issues warranting a multiplier.  Plaintiff’s counsel has extensive experience litigating similar matters.  (See, e.g., Shahian Decl. ¶¶ 37, 39, 41, 45, 55, 63.)  Although Plaintiff ultimately was successful, there are no indications Plaintiff’s counsel engaged in any actions different from their usual strategy to achieve this result.

The motion is GRANTED IN PART.  Having reviewed the billing records and entire court file, the Court concludes $67,002.30 ($74,447.00 minus $7,444.70) in attorney fees is reasonable.  The Court awards that amount plus $4,771.35 in costs and expenses.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT48@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit.  Parties intending to appear are encouraged to appear remotely and should be prepared to comply with Dept. 48’s new requirement that those attending court in person wear a surgical or N95 or KN95 mask.

         Dated this 2nd day of September 2022