SAGETREE VILLAGE MANUFACTURED VS. PIELSTICK, STEPHEN H.

Case Number: 11CA0707    Hearing Date: September 30, 2014    Dept: 77

Defendant Stephen H. Pielstick’s Motion to Compel Accounting and Appraisal is CONTINUED TO NOVEMBER 4, 2014, AT 8:30 A.M. CC § 798.61.

CC § 798.61 contains two requirements that Plaintiff Sagetree Village did not timely comply with. First, management did not submit an inventory to the court pursuant to CC § 798.61(e), see, e.g., West’s Cal. Code Forms, Civil § 798.61 Form 4. Second, management did not submit an accounting report after the sale, see, e.g., West’s Cal. Code Forms, Civil § 798.61 Form 6.

However, there appears to be no reason to conclude that the failure to timely comply with these requirements caused any prejudice to defendant. For example, if there were surplus funds from the sale, defendant Pielstick would have only one year to claim the funds, see CC § 798.61(f). There were no surplus funds.

The Declaration of Jesse Dominguez attached to plaintiff’s opposition complies with the accounting report requirement, albeit late. The Court finds that requirement has been satisfied and that there is no prejudice to plaintiff from the late compliance. Despite defendant’s assertions about the home’s fair market value through comparable properties, the only statutory requirement is that the plaintiff conduct a public sale.

The Dominguez declaration, however, does not comply with the inventory requirement, and thus Sagetree has not formally reported an “inventory of the contents” of the home. This motion is continued for compliance with that requirement. Any issue raised by the inventory will be dealt with at the continued hearing.

Plaintiff Sagetree Village MHC, LLC’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is CONTINUED TO NOVEMBER 4, 2014, AT 8:30 A.M. CCP § 128 and CC § 798.61(d)(2).

“A statute authorizing an attorney fee award at the trial court level includes appellate attorney fees unless the statute specifically provides otherwise.” Evans v. Unkow (1995), 38 Cal.App.4th 1490, 1499–1500. Here, fees are authorized by CCP § 998.61(d)(2).

Plaintiff has requested $17,902.50 in attorneys’ fees on appeal and has submitted the number of hours worked on the appeal (totaling 137.2) by each of three attorneys and the applicable billing rates. Applying the lodestar method, the billing totals would substantially exceed $17,902.50, and it is unclear to the Court where that exact number comes from.

In some cases, this Court would award the requested fees on appeal without detailed time sheets. On the facts here, however, the Court will need to review the redacted invoices promised in paragraph 13 of the Silvestri declaration in order to determine whether (or to what extent) the fee request is reasonable.

Rather than continue the motion, the Court will take the matter under submission only if defendant Pielstick states that he has had an adequate opportunity to review the redacted records and argue from them.

Plaintiff to give notice.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Copy the code below to your web site.
x 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *