In a decision that is important to auto finance companies liable under the FTC Holder Rule where the assigning dealer is defunct, the Fifth District Court of Appeal held in Pierce v. Western Sur. Co., --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2012 WL 2362579 (Cal.App. 5 Dist.), that an Automobile Dealer Surety Bond also covered the attorneys’ fees incurred by a consumer Plaintiff’s… Read More
In Zavodnick v. Gordon & Weisberg, P.C., 2012 WL 2036493 (E.D.Pa. 2012), Judge Diamond whacked an FDCPA Plaintiff’s counsel’s fee application, rejecting as irrelevant and unreliable the boilerplate ‘fee surveys’ often submitted to justify exorbitant rates. Judge Diamond explained: In support, Kimmel & Silverman has submitted evidence relevant to law practice in other regions. The firm offers affidavits from two… Read More
We recently argued, in opposing an attorneys' fee motion, that a survey of attorneys fee rates across the country – and in California –was unreliable as supporting evidence of a reasonable attorneys' fee rate. We argued Plaintiffs’ counsel states that they “maintain an updated survey of free rates charged by other California consumer protection attorneys.” No they don’t. They just… Read More
In General Motors LLC v. Bowie, --- So.3d ----, 2011 WL 1485306 (Fla.App. 2011) , the Florida Court of Appeal was called to determine whether a consumer, in pre-litigation settlement discussions regarding a lemon-law vehicle, could hold out for her attorneys’ fees against a manufacturer’s offer of full rescission prior to litigation.The Court of Appeal found no, explaining: Florida's “Lemon… Read More
In Karapetian v. Kia Motors America, Inc., --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2010 WL 4678691 (C.D.Cal. 2010), Judge Carney exercised his discretion to reduce Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees in a lemon law case. In Karapetian, the Plaintiff’s counsel rejected the defendant’s Rule 68 offer and did not do better in the ultimate settlement of the Action, even though Plaintiff prevailed in the case. … Read More
In Winer v. Family Inv. Co., Inc. 2010 WL 3920365 (2010), Chad E. Winer and Nicole M. Franklin, filed suit against Family Investment Company, Inc. dba Family Honda asserting causes of action for viola-tion of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civ.Code, § 1750 et seq.) (CLRA), unfair business practices (Bus. & Prof.Code, § 17200 et seq.), negligent misrepresentation, and intentional misrepresentation.… Read More
In Purdue v. Kenny, -- S.Ct. -- (2010), Justice Alito authored an opinion holding that there is a strong presumption that the lodestar method of calculating attorneys' fees in fee shifting statutes (in this case, 42 USC 1988) sufficiently compensates the attorney, and that a multiplier, while allowed, is permissible only in rare cases. While Purdue involved a civil rights… Read More
In Davis v. Ford Credit, 2009 WL 3859327 (2009), the California Court of Appeal in Los Angeles held that Ford Credit’s practice of applying a payment to past-due installments first, rather than to the current monthly installment, did not violate the Rees-Levering Automobile Sales Finance Act’s ban on late-fee pyramiding. (Civ. Code, § 2982(k).) The facts of the case were as… Read More
In Griffor v. Airport Chevrolet, Inc., 2009 WL 151698 (D.Or. 2009), Judge Hogan ruled on GMAC's Motion to Dismiss the plaintiff's claim for attorneys fees, which plaintiff claim was afforded by the FTC (and Oregon) Holder Rule(s). Judge Hogan granted GMAC's Motion to Dismiss, holding: Under the FTC Holder Rule, the amount plaintiffs can recover against an assignee of a… Read More
In Coordinated Automobile Lease Tax Cases (L.A.Sup. Coord. No. JCCP 4378), Judge Anthony Mohr presided over litigation involving whether automobile leases and the holders of such contracts properly assessed use taxes on such items as acquisition fees and service contracts. On April 9, 2008, Judge Mohr sustained the demurrers of the various automobile finance companies without leave to amend, holding… Read More
When an out-of-state car dealer successfully demonstrates that California had no jurisdiction over it, does the trial court retain jurisdiction to award attorneys fees to that defendant? Yes it does, said a California Court of Appeal in Shisler v. Sanfer Sports Cars, Inc. (2008) __ Cal.Rptr. 3d __ 2008 WL 4347761. Moreover, in determining whether the car dealer was… Read More
