Hogar

Hogar v. Community Development Commission

Good Law
157 Cal. App. 4th 1358·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 2025·69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 250
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 14, 2007D049452California4,084 words

Opinion

Opinion

Benke, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Hogar Dulce Hogar (Hogar) successfully and substantially altered defendant and appellant Community Development Commission of the City of Escondido’s (the agency) contributions to a state-mandated fund for low-cost housing. Although Hogar did not succeed in obtaining all of the relief it sought, the trial court found that it achieved its primary goal. This determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Hence Hogar was entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5.

In calculating the amount of attorney fees awarded to Hogar, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding an amount based on the hours spent on the case and the trial court’s determination of a reasonable hourly rate for the work provided by counsel. Contrary to the agency’s argument, the trial court was not required to reduce this “lodestar” amount to account for the fact that Hogar did not recover all of the relief it sought. On the other hand, contrary to Hogar’s argument, the trial court was not required to multiply the lodestar to account for Hogar’s perception of the complexity and difficulty of its…

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.