Trial Court Violated Rules Of Court, Rule 3.1702, By Shortening Deadline For Plaintiff To File His Attorney’s Fee Motion.
In Javidian v. Subaru of America, Case No. B322136 (2d Dist., Div. 4 February 16, 2024) (unpublished), Song-Beverly Plaintiff and Defendant reached a verbal settlement through mediation – with the parties agreeing the terms would be memorialized through a Code Civ. Proc. § 998 offer to be served by Plaintiff. During a final status conference that same day, the trial court was notified of the agreement. As a result, the trial court vacated the trial date and set a status conference. However, the 998 offer was not finalized and executed by the date of the status conference, and the trial court set an order to show cause hearing, for less than two months out, on why the case should not be dismissed. Additionally, the trial court ordered that any motion for attorney fees be filed and heard before the OSC hearing. At the OSC hearing, the trial court was notified that Defendant accepted Plaintiff’s 998 offer, and the trial court dismissed Plaintiff’s first amended complaint but retained jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement. When Plaintiff later filed his motion for $119,470.98 in attorney’s fees, the trial court denied it as untimely.
Plaintiff appealed, arguing the trial court violated Rules of Court, rule 3.1702 by setting the deadline for him to file his fees motion on a date that fell before the entry of dismissal of his first amended complaint. The 2/4 DCA agreed and reversed. Rule 3.1702 expressly authorizes a trial court for good cause to extend the deadline for filing a fee motion, but does not authorize it to shorten the deadline. Plaintiff’s motion was timely under Rule 3.1702.
Although Plaintiff first raised this Rule 3.1702 issue on appeal, the 2/4 DCA exercised its discretion in considering his argument because his appeal raised a purely legal question to which Defendant responded.
Comments