LINE: 7 CIV522693 J.B.B. INVESTMENT, ET AL. VS. R. THOMAS FAIR, ET AL.

J.B.B INVESTMENT PARTNERS LTD. BRE BOULEVARD LLC
ROBERT E. CAREY PATRICK BALDWIN

PLAINTIFFS J.B.B. INVESTMENT PARTNERS LTD. ET AL.’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiffs J.B.B. Investment Partners Ltd. et. al.’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs, filed 5-17-19, is GRANTED-IN-PART. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their reasonable attorney’s fees incurred in the appeal from this Court’s 7-21-17 Order granting Plaintiffs’ SLAPP motion. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c); Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1131; Morrow v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1424, 1446.

Defendants have not challenged the charged hourly rates, which appear to be reasonable. Plaintiffs’ appellate counsel is highly qualified. See 5-17-19 Sargent Decl. The charged rates of $650/hr. (for Mr. Russo) and $450/hr. (for Mr. Sargent, who performed roughly 85% of the work on appeal) appear comparable to attorneys in this region of similar competence and experience. See 6-19-19 Moskovitz Decl. at 4 (experienced appellate attorney testifying that the charged hourly rates are “far below what an appellate expert such as myself would charge for similar work.”).

In general (see reductions discussed below), the Court also finds the number of hours expended and the work performed to be reasonable and properly documented. See 5-1719 Sargent Decl., Ex. 10; 6-19-19 Moskovitz Decl. (opining as to the reasonableness of the time spent). Plaintiffs have withdrawn their request for four hours of Mr. Russo’s time on 3-30-18 (see Reply at 13), which reduces Plaintiffs’ request by $2,600, down to $75,585.00. This is based on roughly 90 hours of time spent drafting a 59-page appellate (Respondent’s) brief, preparing for and attending oral argument on appeal, and for fees incurred in preparing this motion. The Court has considered the 7-3-19 Sall Declaration, which alleges duplicative and padded billing, “round number billing,” the charging of professional rates for clerical tasks, etc. The Court finds these criticisms largely unwarranted. It is true, however, that some of the time entries make it difficult to assess exactly what work was performed, and that some attorney time appears to have been spent on clerical tasks. Without belaboring each of Mr. Sall’s criticisms, the Court will reduce the number of Mr. Sargent’s (the primary biller) hours by 12 hours (12 hrs. at $450/hr. = $5,400), for a reduction of $5,400. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees in the amount of $70,185 ($75,585 – $5,400 = $70,185).

Plaintiffs’ Request for Judicial Notice, filed 7-10-19, is GRANTED. Evid. Code § 452(d).

Defendants’ Evidentiary Objections, filed 7-3-19, are ruled upon as follows: Obj. No. 1 is SUSTAINED for lack of foundation. The remaining objections are OVERRULED.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court. Thereafter, counsel for Plaintiffs shall prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide written notice of the ruling to all parties who have appeared in the action, as required by law and the California Rules of Court.

LINE: 8 CIV522693 J.B.B. INVESTMENT, ET AL. VS. R. THOMAS FAIR, ET AL

J.B.B INVESTMENT PARTNERS LTD. R. THOMAS FAIR
ROBERT E. CAREY PATRICK BALDWIN

DEFENDANTS R. THOMAS FAIR ET. AL.’S MOTION TO TAX COSTS TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendants R. Thomas Fair et. al.’s Motion to Tax Costs, filed 6-4-19, which in fact does not challenge/dispute any of the $1,300.56 in costs claimed in Plaintiffs’ 5-17-19 Memorandum of Costs on Appeal, is DENIED.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court. Thereafter, counsel for Plaintiffs shall prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide written notice of the ruling to all parties who have appeared in the action, as required by law and the California Rules of Court.