Cases: Consumer Statutes

Consumer Statutes, Prevailing Party: Attorney Fees Of $144,200 Plus Costs Of $5,969.15 Awarded Under Section 1794 To Song-Beverly Plaintiff Affirmed On Appeal Despite Lack of Prevailing Party Ruling

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Prevailing Party

The Trial Court Made An Implied Finding, Which Was Supported By Substantial Evidence, That Plaintiff Obtained His Litigation Objective And Was The Prevailing Party.             Civ. Code § 1794(d) allows a prevailing buyer to recover reasonable attorney fees incurred in connection with the commencement and prosecution of an action under Civ. Code § 1790 […]

Consumer Statutes, Preemption: FTC’s Holder Rule For Consumer Installment Sale Contracts Does Limit Consumer’s Fee Recovery Per FTC Construction

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Preemption

California Civil Code Section 1459.5’s Effort To Repeal Was Preempted By FTC Interpretation.             Lafferty v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 25 Cal.App.5th 398, 410-414 (2018) [reviewed in our July 20, 2018 post] held that a debtor cannot recover damages and attorney’s fees for a Holder Rule claim under a consumer installment sales contract where a

Consumer Statutes: Lemon Law Plaintiff, Only Awarded $2,221.95 In Fees/Costs Out Of $163,205.60, Has Order Reversed Given That She Achieved Triple The Amount Communicated In Informal/Section 998 Offers During The Course Of The Litigation

Cases: Consumer Statutes

Given Substantial Reduction In Lodestar Request, De Novo Review Resulted In A Reversal.             We can definitely tell you that there has been a surge in published and unpublished decisions on the proper standards to be employed in awarding fees under the Song-Beverly Act, commonly known as California’s Lemon Law.  The next unpublished decision joins

Consumer Statutes, Multipliers, Reasonableness Of Fees: Mikhaeilpoor Opinion Now Published

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Prevailing Plaintiff’s Request For Fees In A Straightforward Lemon Law Case Was Properly And Significantly Reduced For Overstaffing, Lack Of Efficiency, Excessive Hourly Rates, And Denial Of Lodestar Multiplier.             We discussed the then unpublished case of Mikhaeilpoor v. BMW of North America, LLC, Case No. B293987 (2d Dist., Div. 1 April 1, 2020)

Consumer Statutes: Contingency Agreements Are Not To Be Considered In Establishing the Lodestar For An Award Of Attorney’s Fees Under The Song-Beverly Act

Cases: Consumer Statutes

1/3 DCA Eschews The Idea Plaintiff’s Attorney Would Try A “Double Dip” On Fees, Believing They Would Do The Ethical Thing.             In Reynolds v. Ford Motor Co., Case No. A154811 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 21, 2020) (published), plaintiff purchased a diesel engine truck from Ford, having the truck repaired 15 times without success. 

Consumer Statutes, Multiplier, Reasonableness Of Fees: Trial Judge In “Uncomplicated” Lemon Law Case Properly Awarded $94,864 In Song-Beverly Act Attorney’s Fees To Prevailing Plaintiff Winning A Jury Verdict Of $35,805.08

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Plaintiff Had Sought $344,639 In Fees, Which Lower Court Found To Be Unreasonable Based On Overstaffing, Lack Of Efficiency, And Requesting Hourly Rates Too High For The Complexity Of The Case; Multiplier Request Properly Denied.             We commend everyone to read the appellate court’s affirmance of a trial court’s reduction of an attorney’s fees request

Consumer Statutes, Deeds Of Trust: Third District Affirms Fee Award For Borrower Obtaining TRO Under California Homeowner Bill of Rights Legislation

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Deeds of Trust

Fact That Preliminary Injunction Withdrawn Did Not Alter The Result; Its Prior Decision In Bustos Found Persuasive.             In Abdulrahim v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Case No. C085656 (3d Dist. Mar. 11, 2020) (unpublished), bank reiterated a lot of argument as to why a borrower prevailing under a California Homeowner Bill of Rights TRO should

Consumer Statutes, Section 998: Trial Court Erred In 40.4% Reduction To Prevailing Plaintiffs’ Song-Beverly Fee Request For Fraud Causes Of Action

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Section 998

Language in Defendant’s 998 Offer Was Ambiguous And Did Not Allocate Any Portion Of Payment To Any Cause Of Action Other Than The Song-Beverly Claim. Miss Rose Cade – Queen of the Lemons – 1919 or 1920             In Smart v. Ford Motor Company, Case No. C087422 (3d Dist., January 21, 2020) (unpublished), lemon

Consumer Statutes: Patel Decision Now Published

Cases: Consumer Statutes

Song-Beverly Act Plaintiff Receiving No Damage Award Can Still Be A Prevailing Party, And There Can Be More Than One Prevailing Plaintiff Where Two Plaintiffs Are Involved.             In our December 18, 2019 post, we discussed Patel v. Mercedes-Benz USA, Case No. B293813 (2d Dist., Div. 4), which was unpublished at the time.  The case

Consumer Statutes, Prevailing Party: Abuse Of Discretion Where Trial Court Limited Attorney Fees Award Without Regard To Actual Time Expended By Plaintiffs’ Counsel In Successfully Initiating And Prosecuting Case Under The Song-Beverly Act

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Prevailing Party

Trial Court Erroneously Used Plaintiffs’ Separate Net Monetary Recovery As Basis For Determining Prevailing Party Rather Than Plaintiffs’ Success In Meeting Litigation Objectives.            Patel v. Mercedes-Benz USA, Case No. B293813 (2d Dist., Div. 4 December 17, 2019) (unpublished), includes a nice discussion on prevailing parties under the Song-Beverly Act.             Here,

Scroll to Top