Nguyen

Nguyen v. LOS ANGELES CTY. HARBOR/UCLA MED. CTR.

Good Law
40 Cal. App. 4th 1433·48 Cal. Rptr. 2d 301
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 11, 1995B084941California7,338 words

Opinion

Opinion

David M. Harney, Thomas Kallay, Robert H. Pourvali, Esner, Zakheim & Higa, Esner, Marylander, Zakheim & Higa, Rosalyn S. Zakheim and Stuart B. Esner for Movant and Appellant.

Riordan & McKinzie, Jeffrey L. Glassman and H. Jay Kallman for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Bonne, Bridges, Mueller, O'Keefe & Nichols, George E. Peterson, Greines, Martin, Stein & Rinchland, Kent L. Richland and Barbara S. Perry for Defendant and Respondent.

OPINION

JOHNSON, J.

The parties call on us to decide two separate but related issues: (1) May a final judgment providing for periodic payments of future damages be amended at the request of the plaintiff to require a cash advance against future damages in the amount necessary to pay her attorney fees? (2) In determining the maximum attorney fees allowable under MICRA, [1] how should the trial court calculate the "total value" of periodic payments of future damages? We have concluded the trial court cannot amend the final judgment in this case to alter the schedule of periodic payments of damages in order that plaintiff's attorney can recover his fees immediately. We have further concluded that for purposes of calculating the maximum attorney fees…

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.