DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
2026-01544367·orange·Probate·Elder Abuse
Hearing about 1 month agoGRANTED

Townes v. Miles Giffin

Respondent Miles Giffin’s Amended Motion for Attorneys’ Fees

Hearing date
Jul 8, 2026
Department
CM06
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Attorney Fees rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Monetary amounts referenced

$4,680.00$3,240.00

Parties

PlaintiffKaren Townes
DefendantMiles Giffin

Ruling

Superior Court of the State of California County of Orange TENTATIVE RULINGS FOR DEPARTMENT CM06 HON. JUDGE Megan L. Wagner

Date: 07/08/2026 Court Room Rules and Notices

# Case Name Tentative 1 Townes – Elder Abuse (2026 – Motion for Fees – Miles Giffen 01544367) Respondent Miles Giffin’s Amended Motion for Attorneys’ Fees (ROA 41) is GRANTED as set forth below.

Pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code section 15657.03(t) and Code of Civil Procedures sections 1032 and 1033.5, Respondent, as prevailing party, seeks an award of $4,680.00 in fees.

Petitioner Karen Townes filed a Request for an Elder Abuse Restraining Order against Miles Giffin and a separate request against his wife, Amanda Giffin. The two requests were heard together on March 17, 2026. Following the presentation of evidence, the court found Petitioner had not met her burden and denied the restraining orders without prejudice.

As the prevailing party, Miles Giffin now seeks an award of attorneys’ fees. Fees and costs on Requests for Elder of Dependent Adult Restraining Order Allowing Contact (EA-300) are governed by Welfare & Institutions Code section 15657.03(t), which reads in full: “The prevailing party in an action brought under this section may be awarded court costs and attorney’s fees, if any.” (Emphasis added.) A “prevailing party” includes “the party with a net monetary recovery, a defendant in whose favor a dismissal is entered, a defendant where neither plaintiff nor defendant obtains any relief, and a defendant as against those plaintiffs who do not recover any relief against that defendant.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 1032.)

As set forth in section 15657.03(t), costs and fees “may” be awarded to a prevailing party. “The use of the word ‘may’ denotes a discretionary choice.” (Tucker v. Pacific Bell Mobile Services (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1548, 1561.) Here, the court awards fees to Miles Giffin in the amount of $3,240.00 (7.2 hours at $450 per hour).

Respondent is directed to give notice.

Motion for Fees – Amanda Giffen

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share