ISMAEL SAUCEDO VS FCA US LLC

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC683987    Hearing Date: January 07, 2020    Dept: 48

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Ismael Saucedo

RESPONDING PARTY(S): Defendant FCA US LLC

PROOF OF SERVICE:

• Correct Address: Yes.
• 16/21 (CCP § 1005(b)): OK. Served by personal service on December 12, 2019.

• Costs to be addressed by memorandum of costs procedure;
• GRANT motion for attorney’s fees in the amount of $49,603.00.

ANALYSIS

Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Plaintiff moves for an award of attorney fees, costs and expenses in the total amount of $78,963.02, consisting of $49,603.00 in attorney’s fees, $4,559.27 in costs and expenses and a 1.50 multiplier enhancement ($24,801.75) on the attorney’s fees.

The parties prepared this case for trial, but settled shortly before trial began. According to Plaintiff’s counsel, Plaintiff received a full buyback of the subject vehicle plus nearly $40,000 (a total of over $90,000). Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff’s attorney’s fees and costs incurred in the subject action, either by way of informal resolution or by way of a motion for attorney’s fees and costs if necessary. Settlement Agreement, ¶ 5 (Barry Decl., Exh. 5).

Costs

On January 6, 2020, Plaintiff filed a memorandum of costs. If Defendant does not file a timely motion to tax costs, the costs will be added to the attorney’s fees order.

Attorney’s Fees

Plaintiff brought two causes of action pursuant to the Song-Beverly Act, Civil Code § 1790, et seq. § 1794(d) provides:

(d) If the buyer prevails in an action under this section, the buyer shall be allowed by the court to recover as part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees based on actual time expended, determined by the court to have been reasonably incurred by the buyer in connection with the commencement and prosecution of such action.

Here, in light of the fact that Plaintiff recovered more than $90,000 and a buyback of the subject vehicle, Plaintiff is the prevailing party under the Song-Beverly Act.

The Court has broad discretion in determining the amount of a reasonable attorney's fee award which will not be overturned absent a “manifest abuse of discretion, a prejudicial error of law, or necessary findings not supported by substantial evidence.” Bernardi v. County of Monterey (2008) 167 Cal. App. 4th 1379, 1393-94. The Court need not explain its calculation of the amount of attorney’s fees awarded in detail; identifying the factors considered in arriving at the amount will suffice. Ventura v. ABM Industries Inc. (2012) 212 Cal.App.4th 258, 274-75.

The Court finds the hourly rates of $475, as set forth in the Declaration of David N. Barry, ¶ 9, and $400 and $600 set forth in the Declaration of Michael H. Rosenstein to be reasonable, with the accompanying observation that attorneys who bill at these hourly rate should not need to research routine issue of law and should resort to boilerplate when it will serve the client’s purposes.

The Court notes that there was a fair amount of discovery motions filed, and Plaintiff had to prepare for trial. The Court finds that the lodestar amount of $49,603.00 is the amount of reasonable attorney’s fees to be awarded.

The Court declines to award any lodestar multiplier to attorney’s fees.