MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Department 12 Honorable Nahal Iravani-Sani, Presiding Courtroom Clerk, Ryan Nguyen 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113 Telephone: (408) 882-2230
DATE: 05/15/2026 TIME: 9:00 A.M. and 9:01 A.M.
LINE # CASE # CASE TITLE RULING LINE 1 24CV432761 JRK Investors, Inc. MOTION: LEAVE TO FILE v. Fairfield Great Oaks LP Off calendar LINE 2 24CV435464 Ruo Fei Yan MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES v. BMW of North America et al. Please control click or scroll down to Line 2 LINE 3 24CV453851 Jason Stean MOTION: COMPEL ANSWERS v. Associated Plumbing, Inc. The Court seeks clarifying information. Counsel to appear at hearing (In person or remote.) LINE 4 25CV465577 Mathew Reinhardt MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES v. General Motors LLC Please control click or scroll down to Line 4 LINE 5 25CV471760 Brett Sewell et al. HEARING: DEMURRER v. Trim Tech Distribution, et al. Please control click or scroll down to Line 5 LINE 6 25CV478690 Eisenmann HEARING: PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION v. Codex Please control click or scroll down to Line 6
Calendar Line 4 Case Name: Mathew Reinhardt v. General Motors LLC Case No 25CV465577
The Court has reviewed the moving papers, opposition, reply, declarations, and billing records submitted. The Court finds that this action involved a routine Song-Beverly repurchase claim that was resolved relatively early in the litigation after approximately 6 months. While the Court does not undermine the effort put forth by Plaintiff, the Court agrees with Defendant that the case did not present novel or particularly complex issues that would justify the application of a multiplier. Plaintiff has not demonstrated circumstances warranting enhancement of the lodestar, and the request for a 1.5 multiplier is therefore DENIED.
With respect to hourly rates, the Court finds that the requested rate of $500 per hour for the number of years the attorneys have been in practice is consistent with prevailing market rate in Santa Clara County. The Court finds $150 per hour to be a reasonable rate for paralegal work. These rates reflect the prevailing market rates for comparable services in this community.
The Court finds that the number of hours claimed is excessive for the anticipated additional hours requested for preparation of the reply and attendance at the hearing on this motion. The hours shall be reduced from 10 hours to 3.5 - 4.5 hours (see below.)
The Court requires documentation or explanation of costs for “other” in the amount of $200 of the requested $823.44 in costs.
Accordingly, the motion for attorney’s fees and costs is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, as follows:
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
1. The Court grants the reasonable hourly rates at $500 per hour for partner level attorney work and $150 an hour for paralegal work.
2. Plaintiff’s request for a 1.5 multiplier is denied.
3. The requested fees of 10 hours anticipated to prepare for, present, and argue this motion shall be reduced to 4.5 hours. If no one contests this tentative ruling, it shall be further reduced by 1 hour.
4. Plaintiff shall submit documentation supporting the claimed costs with the proposed order.
Plaintiff shall prepare and submit a proposed order consistent with this ruling, including the recalculated fee award and supporting documentation for costs, accompanied by Form EFS-020 within 10 days of this hearing.