Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 36
CHARLES SODERSTROM, Plaintiff, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a corporation; AUTONATION FORD TORRANCE, an unknown business entity; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants.
Case No.: 19STCV02714
Hearing Date: 7/27/2020
[TENTATIVE] RULING RE: Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees, Costs and Expenses; Defendants’ Motion to Strike and Tax Costs
Hearing on Defendants’ motion for attorney’s fees to is continued to August 21, 2020.
Plaintiff is to provide by declaration an updated calculation of attorney’s fees according to the approved fee rates as written for each attorney in this action, and evidence in support of the reasonableness of the rate of Mr. Peterson.
The court awards an additional $112.50 in attorney’s fees.
Plaintiff’s costs and expenses of $3,806.45 are approved.
I. Motion for Attorney Fees
Supplemental Opposition and Supplemental Reply
As an initial matter, Defendants filed a supplemental opposition on July 1
Hearing Date
July 28, 2020
Type
Other Breach of Contract/Warranty (not fraud or negligence) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 36
CHARLES SODERSTROM, Plaintiff, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a corporation; AUTONATION FORD TORRANCE, an unknown business entity; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants.
Case No.: 19STCV02714
Hearing Date: 7/27/2020
[TENTATIVE] RULING RE: Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees, Costs and Expenses; Defendants’ Motion to Strike and Tax Costs
Hearing on Defendants’ motion for attorney’s fees to is continued to August 21, 2020.
Plaintiff is to provide by declaration an updated calculation of attorney’s fees according to the approved fee rates as written for each attorney in this action, and evidence in support of the reasonableness of the rate of Mr. Peterson.
The court awards an additional $112.50 in attorney’s fees.
Plaintiff’s costs and expenses of $3,806.45 are approved.
I. Motion for Attorney Fees
Supplemental Opposition and Supplemental Reply
As an initial matter, Defendants filed a supplemental opposition on July 1