Bussey

Bussey v. Affleck

Caution
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 1273·225 Cal. App. 3d 1162·275 Cal. Rptr. 646·90 Daily Journal DAR 13774·90 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8708
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 30, 1990A045162California1,860 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perley, J.

Defendants appeal from the judgment against them for the balance due on a promissory note. In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we conclude that the trial court properly rejected defendants’ claim of usury and therefore affirm the judgment. Plaintiffs appeal from the post-judgment order for attorney’s fees and costs, which made virtually no allowance for any of the disbursements of plaintiffs’ counsel in connection with the case. In the published portion of this opinion, we hold that such disbursements are allowable as attorney’s fees to the prevailing party on a contract providing for payment of attorney’s fees and costs, if they represent expenses ordinarily billed to a client and are not included in the overhead component of counsel’s hourly rate. Accordingly, we reverse the postjudgment order in part and remand for a new determination of plaintiffs’ attorney’s fees.

I. Factual and Procedural Background on Usury Issue*

II. Discussion

A. Usury

B. Attorney’s Fees

Plaintiffs appeal from the postjudgment order fixing their attorney’s fees and costs, contending that the trial court erred when it declined to award all but $200 of the $11,103.41 disbursed by their…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.