Lower Court Correctly Awarded Lodestar Fees And Properly Denied The Multiplier Request.
The California Family Rights Act allows eligible employees to attend to family serious health conditions and bond with a newly born child. Government Code section 12965(b)(6) allows a trial judge discretion to award attorney’s fees to a prevailing plaintiff, much like the FEHA shifting fee statute.
In Monterroso v. Hydraulics International Inc., Case No. B299946 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 4, 2022) (unpublished), plaintiff won a jury verdict under both the California Family Rights Act and FEHA, even though the FEHA interactive process verdict was reversed on appeal. However, given that the damages under both statutes were the same, the fee entitlement was the same such that a lower court award of $625,000 in attorney’s fees was at issue, a little lower than a lodestar request of $692,616 and also factoring in a denial of a positive 2.0 multiplier request.
The 2/1 DCA affirmed the award as being no abuse of discretion. Although there might have been less than across-the-board success, the claims were so related such that the reduced lodestar fee award was not erroneous. With respect to the multiplier denial, the trial judge could conclude that the hourly rates requested were sufficient to encompass contingency risk so that no further augmentation was necessary.
Comments