This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/16/2019 at 12:57:05 (UTC).

CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU INC. VS DUAL DIAGNOSTIC TREATMENT CENTER, INC

Case Summary

On 01/22/2018 a Contract - Other Contract case was filed by CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU INC against DUAL DIAGNOSTIC TREATMENT CENTER, INC in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1313

  • Filing Date:

    01/22/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

GEORGINA T. RIZK

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU INC.

Defendant

DUAL DIAGNOSTIC TREATMENT CENTER INC DBA SOVEREIGN HEALTH OF CALIFORNIA DBA SOVEREIGN HEALTH RESTAURANT DBA SOVEREIGN HEALTH RANCHO MIRAGE

 

Court Documents

Separate Statement

9/25/2018: Separate Statement

Motion for Summary Adjudication

9/25/2018: Motion for Summary Adjudication

Declaration (name extension) - of Kenneth J. Freed in Support of Motion for Summary Adjudication

9/25/2018: Declaration (name extension) - of Kenneth J. Freed in Support of Motion for Summary Adjudication

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

10/2/2018: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Summary Adjudication)

12/19/2018: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Summary Adjudication)

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continuance of Motion For Summary Adjudication On Breach Of Contract Cause of Action

12/26/2018: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continuance of Motion For Summary Adjudication On Breach Of Contract Cause of Action

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Summary Adjudication; Non-Jury Trial; O...)

3/20/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Summary Adjudication; Non-Jury Trial; O...)

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

3/25/2019: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Memorandum of Costs (Summary) - Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

3/25/2019: Memorandum of Costs (Summary) - Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

Motion for Attorney Fees - Motion for Attorney Fees

4/17/2019: Motion for Attorney Fees - Motion for Attorney Fees

Answer

3/9/2018: Answer

Proof of Personal Service

3/2/2018: Proof of Personal Service

Summons - on Complaint

1/22/2018: Summons - on Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet

1/22/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Complaint

1/22/2018: Complaint

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

1/22/2018: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

9 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/05/2019
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Attorney Fees

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/19/2019
  • DocketCourt orders judgment entered for Plaintiff Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. against Defendant Dual Diagnostic Treatment Center, Inc DBA Sovereign Health Rancho Mirage, DBA Sovereign Health Restaurant, DBA Sovereign Health of California on the Complaint filed by Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. on 01/22/2018 for the principal amount of $9,079.63, attorney fees of $10,260.00, interest of $1,271.15, and costs of $792.29 for a total of $21,403.07.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • DocketMotion for Attorney Fees; Filed by: Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • DocketJudgment By Court Pursuant To C.C.P. Section 437c; Filed by: Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Dual Diagnostic Treatment Center, Inc (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Attorney Fees scheduled for 09/05/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2019
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2019
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by: Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2019
  • DocketMemorandum of Costs (Summary); Filed by: Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Dual Diagnostic Treatment Center, Inc (Defendant); Total Costs: 792.29

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2019
  • DocketOn the Complaint filed by Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. on 01/22/2018, entered Request for Dismissal without prejudice filed by Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc., causes First, Second & Third Cause of Action

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/20/2019
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion for Summary Adjudication: Result: Granted; Result Date: 03/20/2019

    Read MoreRead Less
19 More Docket Entries
  • 03/09/2018
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Dual Diagnostic Treatment Center, Inc (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2018
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Dual Diagnostic Treatment Center, Inc (Defendant); Service Date: 02/08/2018; Service Cost: 40.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2018
  • DocketUpdated -- Summons on Complaint: Name Extension changed from on Complaint to on Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Dual Diagnostic Treatment Center, Inc (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Georgina T. Rizk in Department 77 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 07/22/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause - Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 01/25/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 18STLC01313    Hearing Date: November 18, 2019    Dept: 94

Creditor Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Dual Diagnostic Treatment Center, Inc., et al.

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS

(CCP § 685.040)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff / Judgment Creditor Adjustment Bureau, Inc.’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,985.00.

ANALYSIS:

On January 22, 2018, Plaintiff / Judgment Creditor Adjustment Bureau, Inc. (“Judgment Creditor”) filed the instant action for common counts and breach of contract against Defendant / Judgment Debtor Dual Diagnostic Treatment Center, Inc. dba Sovereign Health Of California dba Sovereign Health Restaurant dba Sovereign Health Rancho Mirage (“Judgment Debtor”). On March 20, 2019, the court granted Judgment Creditor’s Motion for Summary Adjudication as to the breach of contract cause of action. Following dismissal of the remaining causes of action, judgment was entered in Judgment Creditor’s favor on April 17, 2019 in the amount of $9,079.63, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to be determined by motion. On the same day, Judgment Creditor filed its motion for attorneys’ fees. To date, no opposition has been filed.

Code of Civil Procedure section 685.040 states: “The judgment creditor is entitled to the reasonable and necessary costs of enforcing a judgment. Attorney's fees incurred in enforcing a judgment are not included in costs collectible under this title unless otherwise provided by law.  Attorney's fees incurred in enforcing a judgment are included as costs collectible under this title if the underlying judgment includes an award of attorney's fees to the judgment creditor pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) of Section 1033.5.” The motion may be brought with two years of the incurred costs. (Code Civ. Proc., § 685.080, subd. (a).)

The court finds that Judgment Creditor is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees under this statute because the judgment entered on April 17, 2019 includes an award of attorneys’ fees. The motion is also timely brought less than two years after the post-judgment fees and costs were incurred. Judgment Creditor moves for attorneys’ fees of $10,260.00. (Motion, Freed Decl., ¶5.)

The Court’s objective is to award attorney’s fee at the fair market value based on the particular action. (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1132.) “The reasonable hourly rate is that prevailing in the community for similar work.”  (PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095.)   “‘[T]he fee setting inquiry in California ordinarily begins with the 'lodestar,' i.e., the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate . . . .’” (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1134.) The lodestar method is based on the factors, as relevant to the particular case: “(1) the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, (2) the skill displayed in presenting them, (3) the extent to which the nature of the litigation precluded other employment by the attorneys, (4) the contingent nature of the fee award.” (Id. at 1132.) “The ‘‘experienced trial judge is the best judge of the value of professional services rendered in his court, and while his judgment is of course subject to review, it will not be disturbed unless the appellate court is convinced that it is clearly wrong.’’” (Id.) A negative modifier was appropriate when duplicative work had been performed. (Thayer v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 819.) Code of Civil Procedure section 685.070, subdivision (a) states in pertinent part: “The judgment creditor may claim under this section the following costs of enforcing a judgment: . . . (6) Attorney's fees, if allowed by Section 685.040.”

Thus, the Court may award attorney’s fees as costs under Code of Civil Procedure section 685.070, subdivision (a)(6). Code of Civil Procedure section 685.070, subdivision (b) requires: “The notice of motion shall describe the costs claimed, shall state their amount, and shall be supported by an affidavit of a person who has knowledge of the facts stating that to the person's best knowledge and belief the costs are correct, are reasonable and necessary, and have not been satisfied. The notice of motion shall be served on the judgment debtor. Service shall be made personally or by mail.”

Judgment Creditor submits the declaration of its attorney, Kenneth Freed, in support of the request for attorneys’ fees. Freed declares that his hourly rate is $600.00 and he billed 17.1 hours on this matter. (Motion, Freed Decl., ¶¶2, 5.) The court finds the number of hours billed to be reasonable given this was a contested matter that involved a motion for summary adjudication. The hourly rate, however, is excessive. While there is no dispute that Freed has been practicing for more than 30 years, a $600.00 an hour rate is not typical for a straightforward collections matter in a limited jurisdiction court. Judgment Creditor points to no novel or complex questions in the case, nor to any other factors under Ketchum that would warrant an award based on such a high hourly rate. The hourly rate is reduced to $350.00.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff / Judgment Creditor Adjustment Bureau, Inc.’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,985.00.

Moving party to give notice.