Preview
* Fly
he Super;
oun,ty ‘Our, Ep
of,
orf,
Superior Court of California 9S An Slifor, Rha
Bel,
County of Los Angeles Sherp; EP
Department51 arte
202
by tive O88,
fice "eck of
SSicg
LUZ ROSALES, Case No.: 19STCV09350 Cla Ye
rg
, Deputy
Plaintiff, Hearing. Date: 9/16/21
Vv.
PRO BOXING SUPPLIES, INC., et al., RULING RE:
Defendants. Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs
Background
On June 27, 2019, Plaintiff Luz Rosales “Plaintiff” filed a First Amended Complaint against
Defendant Pro Boxing Supplies, Inc., and Abdul Qubadi (“Defendants”) fifteen causes of action
involving various wage and hour claims as well as sexual harassment and wrongful termination.
A bench trial commenced on April 27, 2021, and was concluded on May 3, 2021. The Court
issued a tentative decision on May 4, 2021, and then a final Statement of Decision on June 29,
2021, finding in favor of the Plaintiff on twelve of the fifteen causes of action and ruled that she
was entitled to reasonable attomey fees.
On July 15, 2021, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Attorney Fees against Defendant.
The Court considered the moving, opposition, reply papers and oral argument.
Motion for Attomeys Fee Standard
The Plaintiff has set forth in her moving papers the authority for granting attorney fees for
violations of Labor Code sections 1194 (Fifth Cause of Action) and 226 (Seventh Cause of
Action), for nonpayment of wages and for the failure of an employer to reimburse an employee
for expenses. The question before the Court is whether amount of fees requested is reasonable.
Reasonable attorney fees should be based on an objective standard of reasonableness, i.e., the
qo market value of services rendered, not on some notion of cost incurred. PLCM Group, Inc. v.
&O Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1090. The value of legal services performed in a case is a
bo
fem
matter in which the trial court has its own expertise. Id. at 1096. The trial court may make its
own determination of the value of the services contrary to, or without the necessity for, expert
ho
SP testimony. Id. The trial court makes its determination after consideration of a number of factors,
bo
bo including the nature of the litigation, its.difficulty, the amount involved, the skill required in its
handling, the skill employed, the attention given, the success or failure, and other circumstances
in the case. Id.
Analysis
Plaintiff seeks from Defendant attorney fees in the amount of $127, 563.75, plus a 1.5 lodestar
multiplier for a total of $191, 345.63. In addition, she seeks $8,880 for paralegal services and
costs of $3419.24.
1
Preview
* Fly he Super; oun,ty ‘Our, Ep of, orf, Superior Court of California 9S An Slifor, Rha Bel, County of Los Angeles Sherp; EP Department51 arte 202 by tive O88, fice "eck of SSicg LUZ ROSALES, Case No.: 19STCV09350 Cla Ye rg , Deputy Plaintiff, Hearing. Date: 9/16/21 Vv. PRO BOXING SUPPLIES, INC., et al., RULING RE: Defendants. Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs Background On June 27, 2019, Plaintiff Luz Rosales “Plaintiff” filed a First Amended Complaint against Defendant Pro Boxing Supplies, Inc., and Abdul Qubadi (“Defendants”) fifteen causes of action involving various wage and hour claims as well as sexual harassment and wrongful termination. A bench trial commenced on April 27, 2021, and was concluded on May 3, 2021. The Court issued a tentative decision on May 4, 2021, and then a final Statement of Decision on June 29, 2021, finding in favor of the Plaintiff on twelve of the fifteen causes of action and ruled that she was entitled to reasonable attomey fees. On July 15, 2021, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Attorney Fees against Defendant. The Court considered the moving, opposition, reply papers and oral argument. Motion for Attomeys Fee Standard The Plaintiff has set forth in her moving papers the authority for granting attorney fees for violations of Labor Code sections 1194 (Fifth Cause of Action) and 226 (Seventh Cause of Action), for nonpayment of wages and for the failure of an employer to reimburse an employee for expenses. The question before the Court is whether amount of fees requested is reasonable. Reasonable attorney fees should be based on an objective standard of reasonableness, i.e., the qo market value of services rendered, not on some notion of cost incurred. PLCM Group, Inc. v. &O Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1090. The value of legal services performed in a case is a bo fem matter in which the trial court has its own expertise. Id. at 1096. The trial court may make its own determination of the value of the services contrary to, or without the necessity for, expert ho SP testimony. Id. The trial court makes its determination after consideration of a number of factors, bo bo including the nature of the litigation, its.difficulty, the amount involved, the skill required in its handling, the skill employed, the attention given, the success or failure, and other circumstances in the case. Id. Analysis Plaintiff seeks from Defendant attorney fees in the amount of $127, 563.75, plus a 1.5 lodestar multiplier for a total of $191, 345.63. In addition, she seeks $8,880 for paralegal services and costs of $3419.24. 1