Re-Do Was The Result In This One.
Above: Lockheed Model 18 Lodestar. Source: www.airwaysmuseum.com
In Seltzer v. R.W. Selby & Company, Inc., Case No. B270168 (2d Dist., Div. 2 May 3, 2017) (unpublished), a trial judge in a class action case awarded $29,409 in attorney’s fees to class counsel under the private attorney general statute based on the percentage-of-recovery method rather than the lodestar method. Class counsel has requested a lodestar of almost $473,000 plus a multiplier based on risk. The class recovery was $88,227, such that the actual fee award was a third of that.
The 2/2 DCA reversed. Notwithstanding the equities, the appellate court determined that the lodestar method had to govern as a matter of law based on Serrano v. Priest, 20 Cal.3d 25, 48, fn. 23 (1977) (Serrano III) when it came to a private attorney general recovery. Even though the percentage-of-recovery method could be used as a cross check, the lodestar governed until Serrano III is abrogated for 1021.5 purposes, according to the appellate court. A re-do was required, one based on the lodestar methodology.