Trial Judge Did Not Err In Assessing Settlement Offers With Respect To Overall Request.
In Villa Riviera Condominium Assn. v. Berg, Case No. B269191 (2d Dist., Di. 3 Feb. 8, 2018) (unpublished), HOA did win a CC&R assessment battle against homeowner on a summary judgment motion, then seeking a lodestar amount of $91,936 in attorney’s fees, plus “fees on fees.” Homeowner argued that more than half the fees were incurred to unsuccessfully pursue claims against homeowner’s former wife. Also, opposing party indicated that HOA offered to settle the matter for $40,000 earlier in the case in stark contrast to the $91,936 in fees now requested, drawing objections that these settlement communications were privileged information. The trial judge overruled the objections and entered a fee order of $31,375 in favor of HOA.
HOA was not happy and appealed, asking for more. HOA did not get any more.
The appellate court found that the settlement offer was probative, given it was offered to show that the fees incurred by HOA were disproportionate to the perceived value of HOA’s claim. Beyond that, the reviewing court relied on Meister v. Regents of University of California, 67 Cal.App.4th 437, 449-450 (1998) to recognize that a settlement offer may be used to assess the reasonableness of a later fee request. As far as to the amount of fees awarded, the lower court did not abuse its discretion in reducing fees and did not have to articulate its findings in a detailed ruling.