1.25 Multiplier Sustained; Reversal of One Intertwined Retaliation Claim Did Not Require Reconsideration Of Fee Award.
William A. Offutt, winner of adding machine operators contest, 1937. Library of Congress.
In Warehime v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, Case No. F068843 (5th Dist. Dec. 15, 2015) (unpublished), plaintiff brought a four-count FEHA inspired suit against Farmers, winning $749,999 on all four claims. Then, in the post-trial aftermath, the trial judge awarded plaintiff $696,576.50 out of a requested $747,115.50 for the base lodestar, augmented by a 1.25 positive multiplier for a total fee award of $870,720.63. Fee entitlement was undisputed, based on a FEHA fee-shifting statute.
The fee award was affirmed on appeal to the Fifth District.
Justice Levy, on behalf of a 3-0 panel, did reverse the merits verdict on the retaliation claim, but this did not require a revisit of the fee award because affirmance of the verdict on the other counts—intertwined claims—did not mandate another look-see. The 1.25 multiplier was justified given that plaintiffs’ counsel took the case on contingency, with the panel observing that it was “relatively modest” and less than the 1.5 multiplier requested by plaintiffs’ counsel.
Comments