Cases: Lodestar

Ethics, Lodestar, Multipliers: Lower Court Properly Applied A .4 Negative Multiplier To A FEHA Fee Request Based On Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Incivility Throughout The Litigation

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers

2/3 DCA Agreed With The Reasoning In Karton.             More and more, we are seeing appellate opinions, whether published or not, stressing the need for civility among attorneys in litigation cases.  In fact, there are proposals being considered which would require that California attorneys, annually, have to reaffirm their oath and to confirm they will

Lodestar, Prevailing Party: Reversal Of Judgment For Cross-Complainant And Increased Recovery For Plaintiffs Made Plaintiffs The Prevailing Party So A Fee Order Remand Was Necessary

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Prevailing Party

Given Some Reductions For The Cross-Complaint And Other Issues, Fee Award Had To Be Reassessed—Initial Award Was $388,541, A 50% Reduction From The Original Request.             In Perera v. Moine, Case No. B319315 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 18, 2023) (unpublished), plaintiffs were the prevailing party in a breach of contract dispute (based on an

Construction, Laffey Matrix, Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: Los Angeles County Superior Court Awards A Little Over $1.3 Million In Fees And About $82,000 In Costs In Construction Dispute With Contractual Fees Clause Entitlement

Cases: Construction, Cases: Laffey Matrix, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Decision Provides Insights Into Judicial Resolution Of Contested Fee And Costs Issues.             Because there has not been a lot of fee or costs decisions in the last couple of weeks, we report on a Los Angeles County Superior Court (Norwalk) final ruling on attorney’s fees and costs to a prevailing plaintiff in WnG Construction

Civil Rights, Lodestar, Multipliers: 4/3 DCA Affirms Majority Of $4.053 Million Civil Rights Fee Award To Prevailing Plaintiff, Remanding Solely For A Study Of Hourly Rates Submitted By Three Attorneys

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers

Case Has Interesting Discussions of Civil Rights Lodestar, Multipliers, Hourly Rate Review, and Pro Hac Vice Delayed Admission Principles.             Presiding Justice O’Leary authored Nachtrieb v. County of Orange, Case No. G060294 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 11, 2023) (unpublished), which is a must read for civil rights litigators when it comes to supporting and

Lodestar, Multipliers, Reasonableness Of Fees: Plaintiff Properly Awarded $30,450 In Attorney’s Fees Rather Than The “Ask” Of $98,770

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Fee Request Reduced On Hourly Rate Ask And Work On An Unfiled Summary Judgment Motion, With Plaintiff’s Multiplier Request Being Denied.             Plaintiff accepted a defense CCP § 998 offer waiving a car purchase deficiency and paying her $2,001, with the lower court allowed to determine an award of attorney’s fees and costs to plaintiff

Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: Fee Award Of $700,000 To HOA In Uncomplicated Homeowner Dispute Was Reversed And Remanded

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Record Was Unclear Whether The Lower Court Utilized The Proper Lodestar Reduction Factors For Over-Conferencing, Duplication, Over-Staffing, And Results Obtained.             Ladera Ranch Maintenance Corp. v. Tinsley, Case No. G060730 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 9, 2023) (unpublished) is must reading for practitioners and jurists on salient factors that a party opposing a fee request

Fee Clause Interpretation, Lodestar: $547,465.10 Fee Award And $23,589.25 Costs Award To Prevailing Defendant Sellers Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Fee Clause Interpretation, Cases: Lodestar

Liability Cap Did Not Apply To Fees, Out-Of-County Attorneys Showed Good Cause To Represent Defendants In Tuolumne County, And Trial Judge Reduced Fee Request By 20%.             In Apartment Rental Assistance II, Inc. v. 80 Oak Hills, L.P., Case No. F083238 (5th Dist. Dec. 13, 2022) (unpublished), buyer plaintiffs lost a summary judgment to seller

Lodestar, Private Attorney General, Reasonableness Of Fees: FEHA Fee Recovery To Plaintiff’s Attorney Affirmed As Far As Reductions But Remand Issued To Determine Reasonable Hourly Rate Based On Out-Of-Town Rates

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Plaintiff’s FEHA Request Was Reduced Drastically, But The Award Likely Will Go Up Some When Out-Of-Town Rates Are Considered—Although The $700,000 Award Was Substantial.             When you are doing appellate work on abuse of discretion issues, the primary issue may be whether the lower court used the correct legal principles as far as reaching its

Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: Where Matter Was Not Complex, Administrative Time Billed, and Severely Redacted Time Submissions Provided, Trial Court Was Within Its Discretion To Award $15,000 In Fees Rather Than The Requested $83,631.95

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Fee Amount Is Usually A Discretionary Call.             Bouquet Plaza SDS, LLC v. Kimmel, Case No. B306042 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 1, 2022) (unpublished) demonstrates how attorney’s fee motions should be attuned to lodestar factors, sometimes even offering voluntary reductions to maximize a favorable decision.  Otherwise, requesting inflated or improper fees could result in

Civil Rights, Lodestar, Reasonableness Of Fees: $1,113,750 In FEHA Attorney’s Fees In Racial Discrimination/Retaliation Case Garnering $450,001 Compensatory Award To Successful Plaintiff Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Hourly Rate, Lodestar, And Multiplier Conclusions Were Not Beyond Reason.             Plaintiff in Sterling v. County of Sacramento, Case No. C089616 (3d Dist. Sept. 7, 2021) (unpublished) won $450,001 in compensatory damages under FEHA racial discrimination/retaliation claims.  Plaintiff then moved for over $1.515 million in fees (lodestar plus a positive 2 multiplier enhancement).  The lower

Scroll to Top