Lack of Supporting Proof For Certain Time Frame Dictates Fee Reduction.
Defendant won an unusual unreasonable restraint on alienation battle over a buffer zone, leading the trial court to award fees of $1,007,067 under California’s private attorney general statute (Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5) in Greenlaw Grupe, Jr. Operating Co. v. Land Utilization Alliance, Case Nos. C060939/C063153 (3d Dist. Dec. 29, 2010) (unpublished). Defendant kept his award on appeal, although in a diminished amount. Here is why.
Defendant’s attorney failed to submit competent fee records for work in 2003 through 2005, introducing instead only cursory invoices with aggregate fee totals rather than a description of the number of hours worked or the legal services performed. The total at issue was $112,514.04, which was awarded by the lower court after applying a triple multiplier (so that $337,542 was involved). Applying Martino v. Denevi, 182 Cal.App.3d 553, 559 (1986), the Third District found that the lack of crucial information about hours worked, billing rates, issues dealt with, and appearances on client’s behalf did not provide any competent basis for a fee award. So, this meant the award had to be reduced down to $669,525, in the case of fee claimant’s failure to provide fee substantiation for certain periods of attorney work.