DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26CV-00334·merced·Civil·Anti-SLAPP
Hearing about 2 months agoGRANTED

Raymond Lamerson vs Meyer Pink Law, et al.

Motion for Fees and Costs Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 425.16(C)

Hearing date
Jul 22, 2026
Department
8
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Attorney Fees rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$12,715$1,925$90.49$10,320$10,410.49

Parties

PlaintiffRaymond Lamerson
DefendantMeyer Pink Law

Attorneys

Attorney Graftfor Defendant
Attorney Kimfor Defendant

Ruling

26CV-00334 Raymond Lamerson vs Meyer Pink Law, et al.

Motion for Fees and Costs Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 425.16(C)

Defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs is GRANTED.

The amount of attorney's fees awarded is a matter within the court's discretion. (Clayton Development Co. v. Falvey (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 438, 447.) "The amount of an attorney fee award under the anti-SLAPP statute is computed by the trial court in accordance with the familiar 'lodestar' method." (Cabral v. Martins (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 471, 491 [citing Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1135-1136.) "Under that method, the court 'tabulates the attorney fee touchstone, or lodestar, by multiplying the number of hours reasonably expensed by the reasonable hours rate prevailing in the community of similar work." (Ibid.)

Counsel for Defendant seeks to set the lodestar at $12,715, exclusive of an additional $1,925 for preparation of its reply and requests an additional $90.49 for costs.

A trial court may not rubberstamp a request for attorney’s fees, and must determine the number of hours reasonably expended. (Donahue v. Donahue (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 259, 271.) Here, the total of 29.6 hours billed for the motion and 4.5 hours billed for the reply are excessive. The court finds it reasonable to reduce Attorney Graft’s hours by 0.5 hours and Attorney Kim’s hours by 3.4 hours. In addition, the court finds it reasonable to reduce the hours for the reply by 2.0 hours.

This results in 3.0 hours for Attorney Graft; 22.7 hours for Attorney Kim; and an additional 2.5 hours for Attorney Kim for the reply.

The court must then look at the hourly rate. The reasonable hourly rate is that prevailing in the community for similar work. (PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095.) Accordingly, following a careful review of the work required the court finds it reasonable to reduce the hourly rate for Attorney Graft to $500 and that for Attorney Kim to $350.

With the adjustment to the hourly rate, the lodestar is set at $10,320. This represents 3.0 hours at $500, 22.7 hours at $350, with an additional 2.5 hours at $350 for the reply.

Costs are awarded in the amount of $90.49.

Total attorney’s fees and costs are awarded in the amount of $10,410.49.

The attorney’s fees and costs are to be paid within thirty (30) days of this court’s order.

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