Attorney Declaration as to Hourly Rates and Description of Work Adequately Substantiated Fee Petition Claims.
Defendant contractor and its president, sole shareholder, sole director, and sole employee (found to be the alter ego of the contractor) were found liable for $670,923 in damages in a construction defect lawsuit to purchasers of the Livermore house constructed by defendants. Among other claims, home purchasers won on a breach of purchase contract count where the contract contained a fees clause. The trial court also awarded prevailing plaintiffs $199,607 in attorney’s fees.
In Mathis v. Nahlik, Case No. A121490 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Mar. 25, 2010) (unpublished), the appellate panel affirmed challenges to both the merits and fee judgments in favor of plaintiffs.
Defendants’ challenges to fee reasonableness were basically forfeited by their failure to specify what work was unnecessary or how the hourly rates claimed were not justified. (Avikian v. WTC Financial Corp., 98 Cal.App.4th 1108, 1109 (2002).) The declaration from plaintiffs’ attorney was sufficient to establish that the requested hourly rates were in line with those charged by comparable lawyers in the relevant legal community. (Davis v. City of San Diego, 106 Cal.App.4th 893, 903 (2003).) Finally, the documentation submitted by plaintiffs’ attorneys in support of the fee petition was sufficient, with California law not requiring submission of exact time records. (Wershba v. Apple Computer, Inc., 91 Cal.App.4th 224, 255 (2001).) Fee award affirmed.