On 08/24/2016 GUSTAVO RAMIREZ filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against FORD MOTOR COMPANY. 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.
****1562
08/24/2016
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
RAMIREZ GUSTAVO
FORD MOTOR COMPANY
DOES 1 THROUGH 10
MIKHOV STEVEN B. ESQ.
MIKHOV STEVE ESQ.
PROUDFOOT MATTHEW M.
11/14/2018: Notice
8/24/2016: SUMMONS
11/29/2016: Unknown
11/30/2016: Unknown
12/13/2016: Minute Order
12/13/2016: NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND DEMURER TO COMPLAINT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS OF AUTHORITIES
12/15/2016: NOTICE RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING
5/16/2017: Unknown
5/24/2017: Unknown
6/5/2017: REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT; ETC.
6/12/2017: Minute Order
7/28/2017: Unknown
8/14/2017: Minute Order
8/14/2017: ORDER OVERRULING DEMURRER
8/15/2017: NOTICE OF RULING
8/24/2017: DEFENDANT FORD MOTOR COMPANY'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT
11/7/2017: Minute Order
12/5/2017: Minute Order
at 08:30 AM in Department 74; Order to Show Cause Re: (Dismissal Following Settlement) - Held - Continued
Minute Order ((Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal Following Settlement)); Filed by Clerk
Notice (of Order to Show Cause Hearing); Filed by Gustavo Ramirez (Plaintiff)
at 08:30 AM in Department 74; (OSC RE Dismissal) - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion
Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by Clerk
Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner
Notice of Change of Address
at 10:00 AM in Department 74; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated
at 08:31 AM in Department 74; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated
at 08:30 AM in Department 74; Unknown Event Type - Held - Continued
Notice; Filed by Gustavo Ramirez (Plaintiff)
NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Gustavo Ramirez (Plaintiff)
PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Gustavo Ramirez (Plaintiff)
Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk
NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
SUMMONS
COMPLAINT FOR: 1. BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRAITY - VIOLATION OF SONG-BEVERLY ACT; ETC
Complaint; Filed by Gustavo Ramirez (Plaintiff)
Case Number: BC631562 Hearing Date: December 05, 2019 Dept: 74
BC631562 GUSTAVO RAMIREZ VS FORD MOTOR COMPANY
Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees
TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted in part. Attorney fees of $11,876 are awarded to plaintiff.
Lodestar
The court has reviewed the records submitted with the motion, and determines that a reasonable award is $11,876.
Multiplier
Plaintiff requests a multiplier of .5. “The award of a multiplier is in the end a discretionary matter largely left to the trial court.” (Hogar v. Community Development Com'n of City of Escondido (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1358, 1371.) “[T]he trial court is not required to include a fee enhancement for exceptional skill, novelty of the questions involved, or other factors. Rather, applying a multiplier is discretionary.” (Rey v. Madera Unif. Sch. Dist. (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 1223, 1242.)
“A trial court should award a multiplier for exceptional representation only when the quality of representation far exceeds the quality of representation that would have been provided by an attorney of comparable skill and experience billing at the hourly rate used in the lodestar calculation. Otherwise, the fee award will result in unfair double counting and be unreasonable. Nor should a fee enhancement be imposed for the purpose of punishing the losing party.” (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1138-1139.)
Plaintiff has not established a multiplier should be awarded in this standard lemon law case which settled well before trial.
Motion for Costs and Expenses
Plaintiff offered no argument in the memorandum of points and authorities as to the reasonableness, necessity, recoverability and type of costs and expenses requested. The issue can be addressed through the memorandum of costs.