Luis Sepulveda v. David Abreu Vineyard Management, Inc.

“Civil Code section 1717 provides that ‘[r]easonable attorney’s fees shall be fixed by the court.’...[T]his requirement reflects the legislative purpose ‘to establish uniform treatment of fee recoveries in actions on contracts containing attorney fee provisions.’ [Citation.] Consistent with that purpose, the trial court has broad authority to determine the amount of a reasonable fee. [Citations.].” (PLCM Group, Inc. v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1094-1095.) The party moving for an award of attorneys’ fees bears the burden of showing “that the fees incurred were ‘allowable,’ were ‘reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation,’ and were ‘reasonable in amount.’” (Id. at 816.)

The Court finds, from the Declaration of Edward Rubacha, that the tasks undertaken by counsel for Plaintiff in this action were reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation. (See id. at ¶¶ 3, 5-22, and Exh. A.) The Court further finds that the amounts of time spent on each task were reasonable. Finally, the Court finds that the amount charged by counsel is consistent with fees typically charged in the community for similar work.

Based on the foregoing, the Motion is GRANTED.

Luis Sepulveda v. David Abreu Vineyard Management, Inc. 24CV000839

STATUS OF PAGA SETTLEMENT COMPLIANCE

APPEARANCE REQUIRED. The February 11, 2026 Order provides: “Upon completion of the Settlement, the Settlement Administrator will provide written certification of the completion to the Court and counsel for the Parties by August 3, 2026 which shall be filed with the Court on or before July 13, 2026.” (¶ 16.) There is nothing new in the Court file since February 11, 2026. Appearances are required to update the Court on the status of compliance with the settlement terms.

Ron Peters v. Garrett Lloyd Brumley et al 25CV000149

CROSS-DEFENDANT ACME CHASSIS FACTORY’S DEMURRER TO THE FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT OF GARRETT LLOYD BRUMLEY, CRYSTAL A. BRUMLEY, dba THREE FIVE CUSTOMS; CONSOLIDATED PERFORMANCE INC. dba THREE FIVE CUSTOMS

TENTATIVE RULING: The demurrer is SUSTAINED. Cross-Complainants are granted 10 calendar days leave, from entry of the instant ruling, to amend the operative crosscomplaint. (See Rules of Court, rule 3.1320(g).)

A. PRELIMINARY MATTERS

Cross-Defendant Acme Chassis Factory LLC, a Texas Limited Liability Company (Acme), erroneously sued and served as Acme Chassis Factory, demurs, pursuant to Code of

4