Fees/Costs Not Capped Under Patient’s Blll of Rights But “Per Violation” Reversal Required Relook At Fees Given They Are Based On Results Achieved.
In Nevarrez v. San Marino Skilled Nursing and Wellness Centre, Case No. B235372 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Nov. 4, 2013) (opn. on rehearing/published), a nursing home patient recovered a jury verdict against a nursing home and its operator on certain claims for negligence, elder abuse, and Patient’s Bill of Rights violations even though nursing home was only named on the Patient’s Bill of Rights claim as far as fee-shifting exposure. Later, the lower court awarded fees against nursing home to the tune of $952,142.50 based on a $7,000 per violation under the Patient’s Bill of Rights.
The appellate court reversed the elder abuse claim based on the erroneous admission of some evidence and affirmed the Patient’s Bill of Rights violations, but found the “per violation” $7,000 penalty should have been $500 instead. So, how did the appellate result impact the fee award?
Because the nursing home was named under the Patient’s Bill of Rights claim (which has a fee-shifting clause under Health & Safety Code section 1430(b)), the $952,142.50 fee determination had to be revisited upon remand. Why, you ask? Simple: the “per violation” reduction might impact the trial judge’s view of the “results achieved” under the Patient’s Bill of Rights fee consideration equation, reason enough to look again at the fee award.