MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES
SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Department 12 Honorable Nahal Iravani-Sani, Presiding Courtroom Clerk, Ryan Nguyen 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113 Telephone: (408) 882-2230
DATE: 07/31/2026 TIME: 9:00 A.M. and 9:01 A.M.
LINE # CASE # CASE TITLE RULING LINE 1 21CV376210 Weichiao Ku et al. MOTION FOR TURNOVER ORDER vs Harald Herchen Please Ctrl Click (or scroll down to) Line 1 LINE 2 24CV431226 Kimberly Chaffee MOTION TO COMPEL vs Nimisha Garg et al. Parties are ordered to appear personally in court.
LINE 3 24CV443503 Linda Dashiell MOTION TO COMPEL vs Louie Goros Please Ctrl Click (or scroll down to) Line 3 LINES 4-6 24CV449460 Anthony Alaimo DEMURRER (x2) and MOTION TO STRIKE vs Rosa Pineda et al Demurrers (x2) to the FAC are Unopposed and Sustained Without Leave to Amend [court previously sustained demurrer to complaint with leave to amend where no opposition was filed by Plaintiff]; Motion to Strike rendered Moot by sustaining of demurrers; Notice of Non-Opposition filed by defendant Rosa Pineda regarding Demurrer and Motion to Strike, filed 7/24/26
LINE 7 24CV452135 Bryana Manchester MOTION: SUMMARY ADJUDICATION vs American Honda Motor Please Ctrl Click (or scroll down to) Line 7 Company, Inc. et al LINE 8 25CV459782 Amrit Singh MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES vs Ford Motor Company, Please Ctrl Click (or scroll down to) Line 8 a Delaware Corporation
Calendar Line 8 Case Name: Amrit Singh v. Ford Motor Company, et al. Case No.: 25CV459782
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES & COSTS
Plaintiff moves for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(d) following settlement of this action under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. Defendant opposes the motion, primarily arguing that the fees requested are excessive.
I. Reasonableness of Fees Civil Code section 1794(d) mandates an award of reasonable attorney’s fees to a prevailing buyer. In determining a reasonable fee, courts apply the lodestar method, calculated by multiplying the number of hours reasonably expended by a reasonable hourly rate. PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095.
Plaintiff seeks $8,348.40 in attorney’s fees based on an 16.3 hours of completed and anticipated work, enhanced by a multiplier of 1.2. Plaintiff also seeks $2,036.44 in costs. Plaintiff requests hourly rates of $400 - $600 for attorneys and $145 for paralegals. Plaintiff contends the requested rates are reasonable because of rates awarded in the same market to attorneys with comparable experience, as well as the survey of billing rates. Defendant argues the rates and hours are inflated, the case involved no novel or unique issues
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Having reviewed the moving papers, opposition, reply, declarations, and billing records submitted, the Court finds that the number of hours expended is generally reasonable in this routine Song-Beverly repurchase claim that resolved after approximately 5 months that resolved through settlement before expert discovery, dispositive motions, or trial. The records are sufficiently detailed, and the Court does not find pervasive duplication or improper billing practices warranting a broad reduction in hours. No complexity multiplier is warranted.
With respect to hourly rates, the Court finds that the requested hourly rate exceeds the prevailing market rate in Santa Clara County for comparable consumer warranty litigation. While the Court recognizes counsels’ experience in Song-Beverly matters, the Court finds $550 per hour to be a reasonable rate for partner-level work and $350 per hour to be a reasonable rate for associate-level work. These rates more closely reflect the prevailing market rates for comparable services in this community. The requested $145 for paralegal work is reasonable. Accordingly, the lodestar shall be recalculated.
With respect to costs, Plaintiff seeks recovery of $2,036.44, which is not in dispute. The Court requires further information regarding costs “Other” in the amount of $519.74
Accordingly, the motion for attorney’s fees and costs is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, as follows:
1. The Court sets the reasonable hourly rates at $550 for partner-level work, and $350 for associate-level work.
2. The request for multiplier is denied.
3. Costs are recoverable upon sufficient showing. Otherwise, $519.74 shall be deducted.
4. If no party contests this tentative ruling, the compensable time shall be reduced by.5 hour. The Court will adopt the foregoing rates and reductions and will award fees and costs in the recalculated amount.
Plaintiff shall prepare, serve, and submit a proposed order consistent with this ruling, including a supplemental recalculated fee and costs exhibit, accompanied by the necessary Forms EFS- 020, within 7 days of the hearing.
- oo0oo -