This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/24/2019 at 23:30:01 (UTC).

MISSION WEST LLC VS MACIAS, MARK

Case Summary

On 05/05/2016 MISSION WEST LLC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against MACIAS, MARK. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****5614

  • Filing Date:

    05/05/2016

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Respondent

MISSION WEST LLC

Defendant and Appellant

MACIAS MARK

Claimant

CASTANEDA MONICA

Not Classified By Court

LAW OFFICE OF CLIFF DEAN SCHNEIDER

MEEHAN ESQ SCOTT A

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

SCOTT A MEEHAN ESQ

ESQ SCOTT A MEEHAN

MEEHAN SCOTT A.

Appellant Attorney

SCHNEIDER CLIFF DEAN

Defendant Attorney

ORCHON EDWARD STEPHEN

 

Court Documents

Appeal - Remittitur - Affirmed - Appeal - Remittitur - Affirmed BV032712

8/1/2019: Appeal - Remittitur - Affirmed - Appeal - Remittitur - Affirmed BV032712

Motion for Attorney Fees - Motion for Attorney Fees

8/5/2019: Motion for Attorney Fees - Motion for Attorney Fees

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order Re Reassignment (from Inactive Court)) of 08/06/2019

8/6/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order Re Reassignment (from Inactive Court)) of 08/06/2019

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

8/21/2019: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Summons

5/5/2016: Summons

Response (name extension) - ANSWER

9/26/2016: Response (name extension) - ANSWER

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

5/2/2017: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Minute Order - (Ex-Parte Proceeding)

10/27/2017: Minute Order - (Ex-Parte Proceeding)

Minute Order - (Non-Jury Trial)

1/11/2018: Minute Order - (Non-Jury Trial)

Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

1/24/2018: Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

Motion for Attorney Fees

1/24/2018: Motion for Attorney Fees

Notice of Entry of Judgment / Dismissal / Other Order - (Amended)

2/22/2018: Notice of Entry of Judgment / Dismissal / Other Order - (Amended)

Judgment

2/22/2018: Judgment

Minute Order - (Hearing on Motion for Reconsideration of Service and Entry of...)

3/29/2018: Minute Order - (Hearing on Motion for Reconsideration of Service and Entry of...)

Notice (name extension) - of entry of judgment and amended judgment

4/16/2018: Notice (name extension) - of entry of judgment and amended judgment

Appeal - Ntc Designating Record of Appeal APP-003/010/103 - Clerks Transcript

5/7/2018: Appeal - Ntc Designating Record of Appeal APP-003/010/103 - Clerks Transcript

Appeal - Notice to Appellant of Estimated Transcript Costs

6/13/2018: Appeal - Notice to Appellant of Estimated Transcript Costs

Appeal - Notice of Default Issued

7/11/2018: Appeal - Notice of Default Issued

56 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 10/29/2019
  • Hearingat 1030 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion - Other (name extension)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/21/2019
  • DocketNotice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/21/2019
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Motion - Other Motion for Attorney Fees scheduled for 08/29/2019 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94 Not Held - Continued - Court Congestion was rescheduled to 10/29/2019 10:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/19/2019
  • DocketMemorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees; Filed by: MARK MACIAS (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2019
  • DocketCase reassigned to Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Department 94 - Hon. Serena R. Murillo; Reason: Other

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion - Other Motion for Attorney Fees scheduled for 08/29/2019 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion - Other Motion for Attorney Fees scheduled for 08/29/2019 at 09:00 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 1

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion - Other Motion for Attorney Fees scheduled for 08/29/2019 at 09:00 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 1

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2019
  • DocketMinute Order (Court Order Re Reassignment (from Inactive Court))

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2019
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Court Order Re Reassignment (from Inactive Court)) of 08/06/2019; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
119 More Docket Entries
  • 05/03/2017
  • DocketA/C - MOTION FILING REASON: OTHERS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/03/2017
  • DocketMOTION FILED: MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTN HEARING SET FOR 6/01/17

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2017
  • DocketJURY FEE DEPOSIT RECEIVED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2017
  • DocketNOTICE OF POSTING OF JURY FEES FILED. NOTICE OF POSTING OF JURY FEES FILED. ACTION FILED: MAY 5, 2016 TRIAL DATE NOVEMBER 6, 2017

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/26/2016
  • DocketRESPONSE FILED - ANSWER

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2016
  • DocketNON-JURY TRIAL SET FOR 11/06/17, 08:30 AM, DEPT 77

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2016
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: MISSION WEST LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2016
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FILED - BREACH OF CONTRACT Filing Fee: 225.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2016
  • DocketSUMMONS FILED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2016
  • DocketOSC SET 05/06/19, 08:30 AM, DEPT. 77 PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 16K05614    Hearing Date: October 29, 2019    Dept: 94

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES (Civ. Code § 1717)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Mission West, LLC’s Motion for Attorney Fees is GRANTED.

I. Background

At a bench trial on January 11, 2019, Judge Joseph R. Kalin found that a money judgment should be entered in favor of Plaintiff Mission West, LLC (“Plaintiff”) and against Defendant Macias Mark (“Defendant”). On February 15, Judge Kalin also awarded Plaintiff $40,905 in attorney fees based on the parties’ contract under CCP § 1717. Defendant appealed the award of attorney fees, but on August 1, this Department received a remittitur from the Apelllate Division of the Los Angeles Superior Court affirming the award.

On August 5, Plaintiff filed this Motion for Attorney Fees (the “Motion”) asking for an additional award of attorney fees for the successful appeal. Defendant filed an Opposition on August 19, and Plaintiff replied on August 22. Plaintiff then filed an Amended Motion for Attorney Fees (the “Amended Motion”) October 3. The Amended Motion asks for further attorney fees for the successful ex parte application that was granted on August 29 as well as the Amended Motion. The Court considers the Amended Motion.

II. Discussion

Plaintiff asks for $23,355 in attorney fees for the successful appeal and ex parte application based on the parties’ contract. (Motion p. 3.) Indeed, Plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees for the appeal as well as the ex parte application for the trial work. “Pursuant to California Civil Code section 1717, where a written contract expressly provides for the award of attorney fees, the prevailing party in an action under or relating to the contract is entitled to recover its fees, whether incurred at trial or on appeal. [Citation.]” (Starpoint Properties, LLC v. Namvar (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 1101, 1111, emphasis added.)

In opposition, Defendant contends that the request should be denied because the requested amount is unreasonable and exceeds 1500% of the actual damages in the case. (Oppo. pp. 1-2.) Defendant’s logic does not follow his conclusion. The remedy to a request for unreasonable and excessive attorney fees is to award reasonable attorney fees rather than to deny the entire request.

To determine reasonable attorney fees, the Court “begins with the ‘lodestar, [method]’ i.e., the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate . . . .’” (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1132.) 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 p. 1132.) Contrary to Defendant’s contention, the amount of money judgment entered, is not relevant to determining the amount of attorney fees to be awarded. (Id.)

It is well-established that “‘the verified time statements of [an] attorney [ ], as [an] officer[ ] of the court, are entitled to credence in the absence of a clear indication the records are erroneous.’ [Citation.]” (City of Colton v. Singletary (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 751, 785.) Here, Plaintiff has provided an invoice to show the legal services its attorney provided for the appeal and ex parte application. Having reviewed Plaintiff’s invoice, the Court finds the number of hours spent on various services is unreasonable and reduces it to the reasonable amount of attorney fees of $20,333. Plaintiff is awarded this reasonable amount of attorney fees.

III. Conclusion & Order

For the stated reasons, the Amended Motion is GRANTED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.