Lower Court Could Conclude Consumer’s Requested Fees Were Padded in Making Reduced Award.
Plaintiff consumer reached a settlement with Sears, Roebuck for a gift card dispute under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, preserving the ability to seek reasonable fees and costs from the lower court under the compromise. (CLRA does have a fee-shifting provision codified in Civil Code section 1780.) Consumer sought to recoup $35,287.46 in fees, but was only awarded $6,245.54.
Consumer’s appeal in Hopper v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., Case No. H036754 (Apr. 12, 2012) (unpublished) was unsuccessful.
The lower court demonstrated it used the proper lodestar analysis and did express its view that the request seemed inflated and unreasonable, using a certain date for incurred fees as the reasonable value of services for the original $2,500 dispute involving the gift cards. It was no abuse of discretion for the trial judge to conclude that the request was unreasonably inflated, permitting it to reduce the award (as was done) or deny it altogether. (Bernardi v. County of Monterey, 167 Cal.App.4th 1379, 1394 (2008); Gorman v. Tassajara Development Corp., 178 Cal.App.4th 44, 101 (2009).)
Comments