Trial Court Did Not Abuse Discretion in Fixing Fee Award Even Though Both Drivers Were Intoxicated In Accident.
Dueling intoxicated car drivers had an interesting fee-shifting dispute in a civil case. What occurred in McBeath v. Bustos, Case No. B246122 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Mar. 18, 2014) (unpublished) was that plaintiff (who was intoxicated) was hit by defendant (who was intoxicated, and previously convicted of drunk driving before the trial). The civil case, a little inartfully pled by plaintiff, proceeded to a jury verdict, with plaintiff prevailing but with the jury actually finding plaintiff more at fault. However, plaintiff did get a positive recovery. Later, under a special fee-shifting statute (CCP § 1021.4, which allows fees in the discretion of a trial court in a civil case involving a convicted drunk driving felon defendant), the lower court awarded plaintiff $65,970 in fees, reduced from the requested $79,520.
The fee award was affirmed on appeal. Although the complaint was inartfully drawn, its allegations did encompass a drunk driving felony situation. Defendant’s main argument was that it was against “public policy” to award 1021.4 fees when plaintiff was more at fault. Wrong, said the appellate court, because prior case law established this was only a factor to be weighted in the lower court’s discretionary decision to award fees in the first place. (Sommers v. Erb, 2 Cal.App.4th 1644, 1650 (1992).) As far as the amount, no abuse of discretion was concerned because the lower court did reduce the request by over $14,000.