Mann v. Hernandez CA2/2

Filed 11/5/13 Mann v. Hernandez CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

ROBERT MANN et al., B240546

Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC454053) v.

ROSA HERNANDEZ et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. John L. Segal, Judge. Affirmed.

Robert Mann and Donald W. Cook, in pro. per., for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Henrichs Law Firms, John Henrichs and Stephanie M. Levy for Defendants and Respondents.

_________________________

The issue on appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion in the manner in which it calculated an award of contingent attorney fees to a client’s discharged attorneys, who claim they are entitled to additional fees. We find no abuse and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In May 2007, respondent Rosa Hernandez (Hernandez) retained appellants Robert Mann (Mann) and Donald W. Cook (Cook), and nonparty attorneys Cynthia Anderson- Barker (Anderson-Barker) and Jeffrey Geren (Geren) (collectively, Mann & Cook attorneys), to represent her in connection with claims arising from an incident on May 16, 2007, in which she was sexually assaulted by a police officer from the City of Bell. Hernandez entered into a written contingent fee agreement with Mann, Cook and Anderson-Barker, all three of whom apparently work together. The Mann & Cook attorneys filed two civil rights lawsuits on behalf of Hernandez, one in state court and one in federal court. The actions were stayed pending a criminal investigation. In May 2008, the federal government filed criminal charges against the officer. In March 2009, Hernandez discharged the Mann & Cook attorneys, and substituted in respondent Luis A. Carrillo (Carrillo). Hernandez later testified that she discharged the Mann & Cook attorneys because they rarely responded to her inquiries. Her husband testified that she was also unhappy with the Mann & Cook attorneys because they did not pay her a promised monthly amount. Carrillo and Hernandez also entered into a contingent fee agreement. Carrillo then associated with another attorney, Dale Galipo. In July 2009, the police officer entered a guilty plea to a felony charge of violating Hernandez’s civil rights. He was sentenced in December 2010 to a prison term of nine years. Prior to sentencing, Hernandez and the City of Bell settled her claims for $750,000. Pursuant to the fee agreement between Hernandez and Carrillo, 40 percent of the gross recovery of $750,000—or $300,000—was allocated as attorney fees Hernandez owed for the prosecution of the two civil lawsuits. Following unsuccessful efforts to obtain an accounting from Carrillo, Mann and Cook filed suit against Hernandez and Carrillo to recover their attorney fees. The case