30 Cal. App. 5th 901
Cal. Ct. App. 5th2018Background
- Employee Stratton claimed about $303.50 in unpaid wages; Labor Commissioner awarded him ~$6,061 (wages plus penalties). Beck sought de novo review in superior court under Labor Code § 98.2.
- The superior court awarded Stratton a judgment and awarded statutory attorney fees under Labor Code § 98.2(c); on first appeal this court affirmed the fee award and directed that "the parties are to bear their own costs of appeal."
- After the remittitur, Stratton's counsel (Balter) moved in superior court for appellate attorney fees under Labor Code § 98.2(c) (seeking lodestar + multiplier). The trial court granted the lodestar but denied the requested 2.0 multiplier, and later awarded additional fees for opposing reconsideration.
- Beck argued the appellate remittitur statement that the parties "bear their own costs" precluded any award of appellate attorney fees because statutes and CCP § 1033.5 treat attorney fees as "costs." He also sought clarification of the trial court's reasoning and challenged the amount.
- The trial court declined to treat the appellate-court costs directive as barring a trial-court fee motion and relied on Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.278(d)(2) (distinguishing appellate costs from attorney fees) in awarding the lodestar. The trial court denied Beck’s motion for reconsideration/clarification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Beck) | Defendant's Argument (Stratton/Balter) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to award appellate attorney fees after the court of appeal ordered the parties to "bear their own costs of appeal" | The remittitur’s directive effectively denied appellate attorney fees because attorney fees are "costs" under CCP § 1033.5, so the trial court lacked jurisdiction to award them | Rule 8.278(d)(2) and precedent permit the trial court to award appellate attorney fees despite an appellate allocation of costs; statutes authorizing fees include appellate fees unless expressly limited | Trial court had jurisdiction; an appellate statement that parties "bear their own costs" does not bar a later trial-court award of appellate attorney fees under Labor Code § 98.2(c) and rule 8.278(d)(2) applies |
| Whether Labor Code § 98.2(c) authorizes appellate attorney fees | § 98.2(c) is limited to fees for superior-court review and does not include appellate fees | Statutory fee-authorizations at the trial level include appellate fees unless expressly excluded; § 98.2(c) may be applied to appellate work | § 98.2(c) may support an award of appellate attorney fees; appellate fees may be recovered when a statute authorizes fees at the trial-court level |
| Whether an appellate order denying or not awarding "costs" forecloses a trial-court fee motion | The remittitur’s denial of costs prevents any subsequent award of appellate attorney fees | Rule 8.278(d)(2) means an appellate allocation of costs generally does not include attorney fees and does not preclude a trial-court fee motion | An appellate remittitur directing parties to bear their own costs does not preclude a trial-court award of appellate attorney fees; Butler-Rupp and Mustachio control |
| Adequacy of the trial court’s fee order and denial of reconsideration | The order simply adopted the proposed form and lacked explanation; court abused discretion by not explaining and by not applying CCP § 1033(a) discretion | No statement of decision required for fee awards; the court explained its legal basis at hearing and accepted the lodestar but declined the multiplier; no new facts/law supported reconsideration | No abuse of discretion. Oral rulings and the minute/order were adequate; denial of reconsideration was proper because no new facts or law were presented |
Key Cases Cited
- Stratton v. Beck, 9 Cal.App.5th 483 (court of appeal decision affirming trial fee award and directing parties to bear own costs) (prior appeal in same matter)
- Butler-Rupp v. Lourdeaux, 154 Cal.App.4th 918 (court explained that an appellate allocation that each party "bear their own costs" does not bar a trial-court award of appellate attorney fees)
- Mustachio v. Great Western Bank, 48 Cal.App.4th 1145 (trial court may award appellate attorney fees under fee-shifting provision even where appellate court ordered parties to bear their own costs)
- Ketchum v. Moses, 24 Cal.4th 1122 (no requirement that trial court issue a statement of decision for fee awards)
- Eicher v. Advanced Business Integrators, Inc., 151 Cal.App.4th 1363 (Labor Code § 98.2(c) can support appellate fee awards)
- Nishiki v. Danko Meredith, APC, 25 Cal.App.5th 883 (recognizing § 98.2(c) may include appellate fees)
- Alan S. v. Superior Court, 172 Cal.App.4th 238 (statutory cost rules like § 1033.5 govern trial costs; appellate costs are governed by separate rules)