DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24CV066160·alameda·Civil·Lemon Law
Hearing todayGRANTED, IN PART

LEE vs FCA US LLC

Motion for Attorney Fees

Hearing date
Aug 31, 2026
Department
19
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Attorney Fees rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$690$425$265$47,748$34,595$1,007$84,350$5,024.50

Parties

PlaintiffB Lee
DefendantFCA US LLC

Attorneys

Elliot Connfor Plaintiff
Kira Pattersonfor Plaintiff
Spener Jansenfor Plaintiff

Ruling

24CV066160: LEE vs FCA US LLC 08/31/2026 Hearing on Motion for Attorney Fees filed by B Lee (Plaintiff) CRS# 342378171852 in Department 19

Tentative Ruling - 08/28/2026 Joscelyn Jones

The Motion for Attorney Fees filed by B Lee on 02/17/2026 is Granted in Part.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, and Expenses is GRANTED, IN PART, as follows.

The Court has reviewed the procedural history of this case, based on the papers submitted and the register of actions, as well as the attorney timenote entries submitted by Plaintiff.

The Court determines that the hourly rates requested by Plaintiff’s counsel ($690 for Elliot Conn, $425 for Kira Patterson, and $265 for Spener Jansen) are reasonable.

The Court determines that the reasonable number of hours spent on this case by Elliot Conn is 69.2, for total billing of $47,748.

The Court determines that the reasonable number of hours spent by Kira Patterson is 81.4, for total billing of $34,595.

The Court determines that the reasonable number of hours spent by Spencer Jansen is 3.8, for total billing of $1,007.

The Court declines to apply a multiplier to the fee lodestar amount.

Plaintiff is awarded attorneys’ fees of $84,350 against Defendant FCA US LLC. This is in addition to any amount of sanctions previously awarded by the Court.

Plaintiff shall also recover costs and expenses in the amount of $5,024.50 against Defendant.

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