Cases: Multipliers

Employment, Lodestar, Multipliers, Reasonableness Of Fees:  Trial Judge Did Not Abuse Its Discretion In Awarding Almost $4.9 Million In Attorney’s Fees To Successful FEHA Plaintiff

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

Defense Litigating Long And Hard, If Unsuccessful, Can Anticipate Large Fee Award Against It. Bronshteyn v. Dept. of Consumer Affairs, Case No. B329890, et al. (2d Dist., Div. 8 Sept. 17, 2025) (published) illustrates how a defendant litigating hard by bringing multiple unsuccessful motions, prosecuting an unsuccessful merits appeal, and rejecting a lower CCP section […]

Employment, Lodestar, Multipliers: Plaintiffs Prevailing On Wage Claims Were Properly Awarded $1,767,649.50 In Attorney’s Fees As Against Employer

Cases: Employment, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers

Although Reducing The Requested Hourly Rates For Sonoma County, The Rest Of The Lodestar Request And 1.5 Positive Multiplier Request Were Affirmed.                In Pelayo v. Utility Partners of America, LLC, Case No. A171211 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 7, 2025) (unpublished), plaintiff employees settled with employer, after contentious litigation on the eve of trial,

Employment, Multiplier, Reasonableness Of Fees: Plaintiff’s Win On Some FEHA Claims Justified A $1,385,546 Fees/Costs Award

Cases: Employment, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Compensatory Award Was $709,555, With Counsel’s Skill And Multiplier Request Supporting The Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal.                The trial judge in Ramirez v. Bala, Case No. H049689 (6th Dist. June 30, 2025) (unpublished) awarded a FEHA plaintiff $1,385,546 in attorney’s fees and costs (about the full request, inclusive of a 1.5 multiplier) after plaintiff

Reasonableness Of Fees: Second Dist. Div. 8 Affirms $493K Fee Award And 1.8 Multiplier In FEHA Case

Cases: Employment, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Attorney Fees Are Rather Discretionary, And The Trial Judge Is Usually In The Best Position To Exercise That Discretion.         Pamela Pollock alleged her supervisor, Michael Kelso, sexually harassed her and discriminated against her based on race by denying her a promotion. The trial court initially ruled the lawsuit was time-barred, but the California Supreme

Block Billing, Multipliers, Reasonableness Of Fees: Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Inflated Fee Request In A Non-complex FEHA Case Where Block Billing And Failure To Explain Proliferation In Fees For A Six Month Period Through Trial Justified A Drastic Reduct

Cases: Block Billing, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Fee Request Was About $1.75 Million In A Case Where $36,757.25 In Damages Was Awarded, With A Lower Court Awarding Only $135,102.                Inflated fee requests are often reduced substantially and sometimes denied altogether.  In the next case, block billing, failure to explain a huge jump in the fee request for a six-month period, use

Lodestar, Multipliers: Lower Court’s Reducing Hours/Hourly Rate For Two Attorneys/One Paralegal And Not Applying A Positive Multiplier Was No Abuse Of Discretion In Routine FEHA Employment Case

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers

Trial Judge Applied The Correct Lodestar And Multiplier Factors, Awarding Plaintiff’s Attorneys $1,054,494 In Fees Under FEHA.                In Young v. Dept. of Public Social Services, Case No. B329748 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 6, 2024) (unpublished), plaintiff won $3.5 million in damages on a retaliation claim, but plaintiff’s attorneys sought a $1.498 million lodestar

Class Actions, Multipliers, Private Attorney General, Reasonableness Of Fees: $1.174 Million Award To Class Counsel In Fair Debt Collection Practices Case Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Significant Benefit Incurred, If Injunctive Relief Was Considered, And Other Objections Were Not Specific To Justify Any Reduction.                In Doskocz v. ALLS Lien Services, Case No. A166299 (1st Dist., Div. 1 May 20, 2024) (partially published; fee discussion unpublished), class counsel prevailed on behalf of plaintiffs in case involving some novel and complex issues

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

Costs, Default Judgments, Multipliers, Paralegal Time: $709,620 In Attorney’s Fees Entered As Part Of A Default Judgment After Entry of Terminating Sanctions Was Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Costs, Cases: Default Judgments, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Paralegal Time

Complaint Did Not Have To Plead An Exact Amount Of Fees; 3.0 Positive Multiplier Appropriate; PAGA Settlement Administration Expenses/Paralegal and Legal Assistant Expenses Properly Allowed As Routine Costs.             Haaverson v. Tavistock Freebirds, LLC, Case No. A164043 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Aug. 18, 2023) (unpublished) is an interesting opinion which explores whether a complaint needs

Scroll to Top