Azariah M Ellington Et Al vs Vikram Brar Et Al

Motion for Attorney Fees

Cal. Super. - 4th Dist.November 7, 2016

o o 0 a a n n A a W N N O O N N N N N N e e e m e m e d e m e m m k e d e m e m N R H h R E O S R N R E Z 2 3 R R S R R > 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart Lp 1100 El Centro Street So, Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (826) 243-1100 Fax (826) 243-1111 Robert H. Stellwagen, Jr., Esq. (SBN 150590) Steven J. Pearse, Esq. (SBN 272327) COLLINS COLLINS MUIR + STEWART LLP 1100 El Centro Street South Pasadena, CA 91030 (626) 243-1100 - FAX (626) 243-1111 Attorneys for Defendants LISA FISHER and LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE AZARIAH M. ELLINGTON, MITCHELL D. ) ELLINGTON, Plaintiffs, vs. VIKRAM BRAR, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA APPELLATE COURT, DAVID J. COWAN, MARIE E. STRATTON, MARY THORNTON HOUSE, WILLIAM BARRY, DAVID S. CUNNINGHAM III, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, LISA FISHER, LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER, COREY MCALLISTER, MARCUS R. ELLINGTON, TIMOTHY K. ELLINGTON, KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendants. N r S g r N a ’ N t N t N w N e N a a t N a t N a t ? N a N a t N t “ e u g e n e CASE NO. BC639914 [Assigned to Hon. Sheila B. Fell, Dept. C25] NOTICE OF DEFENDANTS’ LISA FISHER AND LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER AMENDED SPECIAL MOTION AND SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIV. PROC. CODE SECT. 425.16; REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES [Filed concurrently with Declaration ofSteven J. Pearse; [Proposed] Order] DATE: November 8,2017 TIME: 10:00 a.m. DEPT.: C-25 Reservation No.: 72661915 Complaint Filed: 11/7/16 Trial Date: None PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on November 8, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. in Department C25 of the above-captioned Court, located at 700 Civic Center Drive West. Santa Ana, California 92701, Defendants Lisa Fisher and Law Offices of Lisa Fisher (hereinafter referred collectively to as 20354 1 MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES N o 0 a 3 A N W N A a W N = N O O N N O N N N N e e e m e m e m E m e m e m p m e m N E B O H R E E R N R E Z 2 0 a 2 R R 8 5 3 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart LLP 1100 EJ Centro Street So. Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (826) 243-1100 Fax (626) 243-1111 “Fisher”) will, and hereby do, move this Court, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c), for an order awarding Fisher reasonable attorney fees and costs in the amount of $16,068.50, including $13,213.50 for attorney’s fees and costs incurred in bringing her Anti- SLAPP Motion, and $2,855.00 for attorney’s fees and costs incurred in bringing this motion to recover attorney’s fees. This motion is based on the ground that Fisher is the prevailing party on her Special Motion to Strike (hereinafter referred to as “Anti-SLAPP Motion™) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 Azariah M. Ellington’s and Mitchell D. Ellington’s (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs) First Amended Complaint. On September 6, 2017, this Court granted Fisher’s Anti-SLAPP Motion in its entirety without leave to amend. This motion is based on this Notice, the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Steven J. Pearse and attached Exhibits, on all matters of which this Court may take judicial notice, on all pleadings, files, and records in this action, and on such oral or documentary evidence as may be presented at the hearing ofthis motion. DATED: September 13, 2017 COLLINS COLLINS MUIR + STEWART LLP SKEVEN J. PEARSE BERT H. STELLWAGEN,JR. Attorneys for Defendants LISA FISHER and LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER By: 20351 2 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES e o e e N a S N U n RA R W N = M O R O N O R D E m m m p m e m e m p m je m m d e k e d 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart Lp 1100 EI Centro Street So, Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (626) 243.1100 Fax (626) 243-1111 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES L INTRODUCTION On September 6, 2017, this Court granted Lisa Fisher's and the Law Offices of Lisa Fisher's (hereinafter referred collectively to as “Fisher”) Special Motion to Strike (hereinafter referred to as “Anti-SLAPP Motion”) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 as to Azariah M. Ellington’s and Mitchell D. Ellington’s (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs™) First Amended Complaint. As the prevailing party, Fisher is now entitled to recover the reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in bringing the Anti-SLAPP Motion and in bringing the instant motion to recover attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to California Code ofCivil Procedure section 425.16(c)(1) for a total of $16,068.50. IL STATEMENT OF FACTS On November 7, 2016, Plaintiffs filed their original Complaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The 41 page Complaint alleged the following 23 causes of action 1) Misrepresentation, 2) Aiding and Abetting, 3) Intentional Interference with Business Relations, 4) Absue of Process, 5) Gross Negligence; 6) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; 7) False Imprisonment; 8) Fraud; 9) Conspiracy to Commit Fraud; 10) Elder Abuse; 11) Endangerment of an Elder; 12) Wrongful Death; 13) Conspiracy to Defraud Decedent’s Estate; 14) Abuse of Authority; 15) Betrayal of Public’s Trust; 16) Invasion of Privacy; 17) Forgery; 18) Perjury; 19) Subornation to Commit Perjury; 20) Judge Shopping; 21) Violation of Appellate Stay; 22) Record Tampering; and 23) Mail Fraud. (Decl. Steven J. Pearse 9 2). On January 20, 2016 Fisher filed her original Anti-SLAPP Motion to the original Complaint. (/d. at § 3). On March 16, 2017, the Court sustained co-defendant Vikram Brar’s Demurrer with leave to amend to clarify the causes of action as alleged against Brar only. (/d. at 4). On April 3, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a completely revised First Amended Complaint, which included new allegations against Fisher and affected Fisher's original Anti-SLAPP Motion. (/d. at 9 5). The First Amended Complaint, although narrowed down to five (5) causes of action, is 89 20351 3 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES N o 9 0 N a A N h h R a W N = - N o ~ ~ | ] n o p k J Ju d j o - " p i Ju d u d p t J d 3 R K O n 2 W w N p t (= ) & [- -] ~ 3 a N w n = W w N o i o 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart LLP 1100 EJ Centro Street So. Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (826) 243-1100 Fax (626) 243-1111 pages long and drastically increased the allegations and blended former separate causes of action together. (Id. at q 5). On April 11, 2017, Fisher obtained ex parte relief to re-file its Anti-SLAPP Motion to permit a response to the new allegations raised against Fisher in the First Amended Complaint. (Id. at J 6). On June 1, 2017 the Los Angeles County Superior Court, on its own motion, transferred this matter to the Orange County Superior Court, vacating Fisher’s hearing date for her amended Anti-SLAPP Motion. (/d. at § 7). On June 9, 2017 Fisher filed her amended Anti-SLAPP Motion to strike Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint pursuant to California Code ofCivil Procedure section 425.16. (Pearse Decl. 9 8). On September 6, 2017, this Court granted Fisher’s Anti-SLAPP Motion, in its entirety, without leave to amend. (/d. at 19). A true and correct copy ofthe tentative ruling adopted as the final ruling is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” to the Declaration of Steven J. Pearse. As a result of this Court’s September 6, 2017 order, Fisher is the prevailing party and is entitled to recover the attorney’s fees she incurred in bringing the Anti-SLAPP Motion and the attorney’s fees and costs incurred to bring the instant motion. (California Code ofCivil Procedure § 425.16(c)(1); Jackson v. Yarbray, (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 75, 92; Ketchum v. Moses, (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1141). (/d. at 9 10). Fisher has expended $13,213.50 in attorney’s fees at a rate of $190 for Partners and $165.00 for Associates in bringing her Anti-SLAPP Motion and has and/or will incur an additional $2,855.00 in brining this motion. (Id. at § 11). IIL. FISHER IS STATUTORILY ENTITED TO ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS AS THE PREVAILING PARTY ON HER ANTI-SLAPP MOTION California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c)(1) states in pertinent part that “a prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover his or her attorney’s fees and costs.” A prevailing defendant within the meaning of California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c)(1) even includes defendants whose Anti-SLAPP motions are granted to some causes of action but not to others. (Huntingdon Life Sciences, Inc. v. Stop Huntington Animal Cruelty USA, Inc., (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 1228, 1267). As the prevailing party Defendant on her 20351 4 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES N o 8 N a S N n t d a W N N o | ] » N o - J t f d J f o p h p t p d p u J 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart Le 1100 El Centro Street Sa, Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (626) 243-1100 Fax (826) 243-1111 Anti-SLAPP Motion, Fisher is entitled to an award of her attorney’s fees and costs incurred in bringing her Anti-SLAPP motion. (Kechum, 24 Cal.4th at 1131-32). The purpose of such an award is to “adequately compensate the defendant for the expense of responding to a baseless lawsuit.” (Dove Audio v. Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman, (1996) 47Cal.App.4th 777,785). Iv. FISHER’S ANTI-SLAPP MOTION ACHIEVED A PRACTICAL BENEFIT Fisher was completely successful on her Anti-SLAPP Motion. (Id. at § 9). As a result, Fisher disposed of each and every cause of action that Plaintiffs levied against Fisher. Accordingly, Plaintiffs will not be able to recover any damages from Fisher and Fisher has “successfully narrowed the scope of the lawsuit, limit[ed] discovery, reduc[ed] potential recoverable damages, and alterfed] the settlement posture of the case.” (Mann v. Quality Old Time Serv., Inc., (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 328, 340). Thus, dismissal of all causes of action as to Fisher “cannot be considered trivial victories for defendants in the context ofthis case” and Fisher should be awarded attorney’s fees in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c). (Marrow v. Los Angeles Unified School District, (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1427, 1446). Vv. FISHER IS ALSO ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS INCURRED IN BRINING THIS MOTION TO RECOVER ATTORNEY'S FEE The California Supreme Court held that “an award of fees may include not only the fees incurred with respect to the underlying claim, but also the fees incurred in enforcing the right to mandatory fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.” The California Supreme Court further found that “absent circumstances rendering the award unjust, fees recoverable . . ordinarily include compensation for all hours reasonably spent, including those necessary to establish and defend the fee claim.” Moreover, “in order to effectuate the purpose of the anti-SLAPP statute and the Legislature’s intent to deter SLAPP suits, a defendant who appears in a SLAPP action . . . [and] successfully brings . . a special motion to strike the complaint under section 425.16,is entitled to recover an award of reasonable attorney fees under the mandatory provision of subdivision (c) of that section in order to compensate the retained counsel for the legal services provided in 20351 5 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES 0 a N n n A W N N O O N O N N R N N N N e m E m E m e m e m e m e k e w e m J O A E W N m 2 8 e a S N E w N e o O 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart Lp 1100 ET Ceniro Street So. Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (828) 243-1100 Fax (826) 243-1111 connection with both the special motion to strike, and the recovery ofattorney fees and costs under that subdivision. (Dowling v. Zimmerman, (2001) 85 Cal.App.4th 1400, 1425). VI. FISHER IS ENTITED TO RECOERY REASONABLE ATTORNEY’S FEES INCURRED INBRINING HER ANTI-SLAPP MOTION AND THIS MOTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,068.50 The reasonableness of attorney fees recoverable under the Anti-SLAPP statute is within the discretion ofthe trial court. (Russell v. Foglio, (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 653, 661). The “reasonable hourlyrate is that prevailing in the community for similar work.” (PLCM Group v. Drexler, (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095). The California Court of Appeal specifically affirmed a trial court award of $350.00 per hour as reasonable, asserting that “[t]he reasonable market value of the attorney’s services is the measure of a reasonable hourly rate. [Citations.] This standard applies regardless of whether the attorneys claiming fees charge nothing for their services, charge at below-market or discounted rates, represent the client on a straight contingent fee basis, or are in -house counsel. [Citations.].” (Chacon v. Litke, (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 1234, 1260; see also Nemecek & Cole v. Horn, (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 641, 651-652). The California Supreme Court has upheld the lodestar method for determining the appropriate amount of attorney fees for a prevailing defendant on an Anti-SLAPP Motion. (Ketchum, 24 Cal.4th at 1136). According to this method, a court assesses attorney fees by first determining the time spent and the reasonable hourly compensation of each attorney. (/d. at 1131- 1132). The court next determines whether that lodestar figure should be adjusted based on various relevant factors, including the experience and abilities ofthe attorney and the novelty and difficulty of the issues. (/d. at 1132). And, in determining the reasonableness of attorney’s fees incurred in bringing an Anti-SLAPP Motion “the verified time statements of [an] attorney [], as [an] officer [] of the court, are entitled to credence in the absence of a clear indication the records are erroneous.” (City of Colton v. Singletary, (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 751, 785, citing Horsford v. Board of Trustees ofCalifornia State University, (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 359, 396). Here, Fisher has incurred $13,213.50 at an hourly rate of $190.00 for partners and $165.00 20351 6 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES L o R N N n A e W N N O O N N O N N N e e e m e m e m e m e d e m je s j e j e N R H H R E O R R E 8 2 2 3 3 2 2 a 0 = = 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart LLP 1100 EI Centro Street So, Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (626) 243-1100 Fax (826) 243-9111 for associates as detailed in the Declaration of Steven J. Pearse. A total of 79.9 hours (71.1 by Associates and 7.8 by a Partner) were spent to investigate, research, draft two (2) Anti-SLAPP Motions, including supporting documents, draft an ex parte application seeking permission to file an amended Anti-SLAPP Motion and attend a hearing on the same, attend the hearing on the amended Anti-SLAPP Motion, and file and serve the final ruling. The time Fisher’s attorneys spent on these activities was justified as Plaintiffs’ original Complaint and their First Amended Complaint contravened the Anti-SLAPP statute. Moreover, Plaintiffs’ wilful violation of the Court’s order permitting the Plaintiffs to amend their original Complaint only as to claims related to co-Defendant Brar caused Fisher to spend even more money unnecessarily. Because the First Amended Complaint expanded claims asserted against Fisher, Fisher was forced to investigate, research, and draft an amended Anti-SLAPP as to the First Amended Complaint to address these new issues. Plaintiffs also caused Fisherto incur fees seeking ex parte relief to have the amended Anti-SLAPP Motion heard, including drafting an ex parte application, contacting all parties regarding the ex parte hearing, and attending the hearing. Fisher has and will incur an additional $2,855.00 in attorney’s fees to draft the instant motion, file a reply as necessary, and prepare for and attend the hearing on this motion. Thus, Fisher will have incurred a total of $16,068.50, which she is entitled to recover pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c). California case authority addressing the reasonableness of attorney’s fee awards related to Anti-SLAPP motions supports the reasonableness of an award of $16,068.50. In Bernardo v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 322, 339, 368, the Court upheld an award of $77,835.25. In Rosenaur v. Scherer, (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 260, 282-286, 288, the Court affirmed an award of $65,386.61, although defense counsel provided part of the attorney's services on a pro bono basis. In Cabral v. Martins, (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 471, 490, the Court affirmed a $30,000 attorney fees award. In Dove Audio, Inc. v. Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman, (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 777, 785, the Court found an award of $28,296 was not an abuse of discretion. And, in Premier Med. Mgmt. Sys., Inc. v. California Ins. Guarantee Ass'n., (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 550, 560-563, the Court found that a total of 345 hours spent on joint anti-SLAPP motion by attorneys 20351 7 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES N e 0 1 a A W n A W N = R O R N O N O N O N R N e m m m e m e m e m e m k m j e N R B R O R N R R E B Z Z 2 3 2 a r 0 8 = 3 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart LLP 1100 El Ceniro Sireet So. Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (828) 243-1100 Fax (628) 243-1111 for two defendants was not unreasonably excessive. Based on these previous awards, an award of $16,068.50 is within the reasonable range. As such, Fisher respectfully requests this Motion for Attorney’s Fees made pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c)(1) be granted. vii CONCLUSION As the prevailing party to her Anti-SLAPP Motion, Fisher is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to California Code Civil Procedure section 425.16(c). An award of $16,068.50 is a reasonable amount expended by Fisher’s attorneys given that Fisher had to file and draft two (2) Anti-SLAPP Motion and seek ex parte relief based on the Plaintiffs’ action, and through no fault of her own. DATED: September 13, 2017 COLLINS COLLINS MUIR + STEWART LLP By: (SHEVEN J. PEARSE ROBERT H. STELLWAGEN, JR. Attorneys for Defendants LISA FISHER and LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER 20351 8 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES N O 0 0 0 A A W n E a W d = N O O N O N O N N D R N N E m e m E m E w e m e m e m e m e d e s N N N M E W N e m S N N N R e W N = e O o 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart LLe 1100 E! Centro Street So, Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (626) 243-1100 Fax (826) 243-1111 Robert H. Stellwagen, Jr., Esq. (SBN 150590) Steven J. Pearse, Esq. (SBN 272327) COLLINS COLLINS MUIR + STEWART LLP 1100 El Centro Street South Pasadena, CA 91030 (626) 243-1100 -- FAX (626) 243-1111 Attorneys for Defendants LISA FISHER and LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE AZARIAH M. ELLINGTON, MITCHELL D. ELLINGTON, CASE NO. BC639914 [Assigned to Hon. Sheila B. Fell, Dept. C25] Plaintiffs, DECLARATION OF STEVEN J. PEARSE IN SUPPORT OF LISA FISHER’S AND THE LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES VS. VIKRAM BRAR, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA APPELLATE COURT, DAVID J. COWAN, MARIE E. STRATTON, MARY THORNTON HOUSE, WILLIAM BARRY, DAVID S. CUNNINGHAM III, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, LISA FISHER, LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER, COREY MCALLISTER, MARCUS R. ELLINGTON, TIMOTHY K. ELLINGTON, KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, [Filed concurrently with Notice ofMotion and Motionfor Attorney's Fees, [Proposed] Order] DATE: November 8, 2017 TIME: 10:00 a.m. DEPT.: C-25 Reservation No.: 72661915 Complaint Filed: 11/7/16 Defendants. Trial Date: None N r ’ w r N w N r N r ? N e N t N e N e w t e t S t N t a t a t N a e a t N u “ o e p t t N a t g t “ a t e t u t N u t DECLARATION OF STEVEN J. PEARSE, ESQ. I, Steven J. Pearse, Esq. declare as follows: I. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice law before all of the courts in the State of 20351 9 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES o o N a S N n t E a W N N O N N N R R N E m m k e m h k e w e m m k e k e k e w N R H G R B H R R E B Z T 2 I A R G o n R B 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart LLp 1100 El Centro Street So, Pasadena, CA 81030 Phone (626) 243-1100 Fax (626) 243-1111 California and am an associate in the law firm of Collins Collins Muir + Stewart, LLP, attorneys of record for LISA FISHER and the LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER (hereinafter collectively referred to as “FISHER”) in the above-referenced matter. 1 am the attorney with primary responsibility for the handling of this matter and have personal knowledge of the facts contained herein, and if called to testify I could and would competently do so. I make this declaration in support of Fisher’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees made pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c). 2. On November 7, 2016, Plaintiffs filed their original Complaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The 41 page Complaint alleged the following 23 causes of action 1) Misrepresentation, 2) Aiding and Abetting, 3) Intentional Interference with Business Relations, 4) Absue of Process, 5) Gross Negligence; 6) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; 7) False Imprisonment; 8) Fraud; 9) Conspiracy to Commit Fraud; 10) Elder Abuse; 11) Endangerment of an Elder; 12) Wrongful Death; 13) Conspiracy to Defraud Decedent’s Estate; 14) Abuse of Authority; 15) Betrayal of Public’s Trust; 16) Invasion of Privacy; 17) Forgery; 18) Perjury; 19) Subornation to Commit Perjury; 20) Judge Shopping; 21) Violation of Appellate Stay; 22) Record Tampering; and 23) Mail Fraud. 3. On January 20, 2016 Fisher filed her original Anti-SLAPP Motion to the original Complaint. 4. On March 16, 2017, the Court sustained co-defendant Vikram Brar’s Demurrer with leave to amend to clarify the causes of action as alleged against Brar only. 5. On April 3, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a completely revised First Amended Complaint, which affected Fisher’s original Anti-SLAPP Motion. The First Amended Complaint, although narrowed down to 5 causes of action, was 89 pages long drastically increased the allegations and blended former causes of action together. 6. On April 11, 2017, Fisher obtained ex parte relief to re-file its Anti-SLAPP Motion to permit a response to the new allegations raised against Fisherin the First Amended Complaint. 7. On June 1, 2017 the Los Angeles County Superior Court, on its own motion, transferred this matter to the Orange County Superior Court, vacating Fisher’s revised hearing date 20351 10 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES o 9 0 a S a G n h a W N = N O N O N O N N N E e e m je m e m e d e m e m e m e m e m N R H h R U B R N R E B Z S 2 3 2 2 n o m R = R 3 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart up 1100 EI Gentro Strsel 50, Pasadena, CA $1030 Phone (626) 243-1100 Fax (826) 243-1111 for her Anti-SLAPP Motion. 8. On June 9, 2017 Fisher filed her Anti-SLAPP Motion to strike Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint pursuant to California Code ofCivil Procedure section 425.16. 9. On September 6, 2017, this Court granted Fisher’s Anti-SLAPP Motion, in its entirety, without leave to amend. A true and correct copy ofthe tentative ruling adopted as the final ruling is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. 10. As a result of this Court’s September 6, 2017 order, Fisher is the prevailing party and is entitled to recover the attorney’s fees she incurred in bringing the Anti-SLAPP Motion and the attorney’s fees and costs incurred to bring the instant motion. (California Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16(c)(1); Jackson v. Yarbray, (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 75, 92; Ketchum v. Moses, (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1141). 11. Fisher has expended $13,213.50 in attorney’s fees at a rate of $190 for Partners and $165.00 for Associates in bringing its Anti-SLAPP Motion and has and/or will incur an additional $2,855.00 in bringing this motion. 12. A total of 79.9 hours (71.1 by Associates and 7.8 by a Partner) were spent to investigate, research, and draft an Anti-SLAPP Motion as to the original Complaint, investigate, research, and draft an amended Anti-SLAPP Motion as to the First Amended Complaint, draft an ex parte application, notify all parties, and attend a hearing to seek relief to file the amended Anti- SLAPP Motion, attend the hearing on the amended Anti-SLAPP Motion, and file and serve the final ruling. Such time was necessary given the aforementioned tasks and the sheer volume and gravity of the original and amended claims levied against Fisher. Another 17 hoursis estimated to be incurred drafting this motion, drafting any reply, and preparing for and attending the hearing for this Motion. 12. The attorneys working on this matter on behalf of Fisher are all members in good standing with the California Bar. Robert H. Stellwagen, Jr., Esq. is a partner at the firm with 25 years of experience and certified legal specialty in legal malpractice. 1 aman associate at the firm and have been practicing since 2010. 13. Based on the plethora ofissues raised by the Plaintiffs in their original Complaint 20351 11 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES N o W N A E a W N N O O N O N O N O N N N O N N e m o m m m e m e e e m e m e k e m e m N N n h A W N m S 8 a S R A W N = e D O 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart Le 1100 El Centro Street So, Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (626) 243-1100 Fax (828) 243-1111 and then in their First Amended Complaint andthe need to file (2) Anti-SLAPP Motions and seek ex parte relief necessitated all work completed by the aforementioned attorneys. [ declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 20351 Executed on September 13, 2017 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. SEVEN J. PEARSE Declarant 12 MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES EXHIBIT A CIvV-130 ATTORNEY BR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY ) FOR COURTUSE ONLY Robert H, Stellwagen, Esq,"SBN150566)Steven Pearse (SBN 272327) Collins Collins Muir +Stewart, LLP 1100 Ei Centro Street ELECTRONICALLY FILED South Pasadena, CA 91030 Superier Court of Califamia, TELERORC NO: (626) 243-1100 FANG (oprona((626) 243-1111 Courty of Orange EMAILARORESS(oplonel: spearse(@ocmslaw.com 09/08/2017 at 05:34:00 Ph arrorney ror meme): Lisa Fisher and Law Offices ofLisa Fisher Clerk of the Superior Court SUPERIOR GOURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF Orange By & Clerk, Deputy Clerk sTREETALDRESS: 70) West Civi Center Drive MAILING ADORESS; OITY-AND ZIP CODE. Sania Ana92701 srRancH Name: Central Justice Center PLAINTIFFPETITIONER: Azariah M, Ellington and Mitchell D. Ellington DEFENDANT/RESPORDENT: Vikram Brar,et al, NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT CASE NUMBER: OR ORDER BC639914 (Check one): UNLMITED CASE [1 LIMITED GASE {Amount demanded {Amount demanded was exceeded $25,000) $25,000 or less) TO ALL PARTIES : 1. A judgment, decree,or order was entered irthis action on (dafe}; Septemnber 6,2017 2. A copy of the judgment, decree, or orderis attached.to this notice. Date; September 8, 2017 ‘Steven J, Pearse ) {TYPE OR PRINT HAME.OF [¢_] ATTORNEY [| PARTY WATHOUT ATTORNEY) Pogriof2 Form for Use WwCODING.54500 tonSorSatons: NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT OR ORDER Department C-25 Law and Motion- 09,06.17 No. 5 -Ellingtonv. -BC639914 MOTION - Special MotiontoStrike- Anti-SLAPP TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants’, Lisa Fisherand theLawOffices of Lisa Fisher, unopposed Speeial Motion to Strikeplaintiffs First Amended Complaint is GRANTED. a PROOF OF SERVICE {CCP &§ 1013(a) and 2015.5; FRCP 5) State ofCalifornia, ) ) ss County of San Bemardino. ) T.am employed irrthe County of Los Angeles, J am over the age-of 18 and nat aparty to the within action; my businéss address is 1068] Foothill Boulevard, Suite 260, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. On this date, I served the foregoingdocument described as NOTICEOFENTRY OFJUDGMENTOR ORDER on the interested parties in this ation by placing same: in a scaled envelope, addressedus follows: SEEATTACHED SERVICE LIST XI BYMAIL) - | caused such cnvelope(s)y with postage thereon fully prepaid to be: placed in the United States mail in Rancho Cucamonga, California fo be served on the parties as indicated on theattached service list. ( am “readily familiar” with the firm's pragticeofcollectionand processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S, Postal Service of that same day with postage theron fully prepaid a Rancho Cucamonga, California in the ordinary ¢ourse of business, 1am aware that on molion of the party served, service is presumed irvalid if postal cancellation dateor pasiage meter date is more than oneday afler date ofdeposit for maiting in affidavit. (1 (BY CERTIFIED MAIL)- I caused such envelope(s) with postage thereon fully prepaid via Certified Mall Return Receipt Requested to be placed inthe United States Mail in RanchoCucamonga, California. [0 (BY ELECTRONICFILING AND/OR SERVICE) [ served a true copy, withall exhibits, electronically on designated recipients listed on theattached Serviee List on: (Date) at (Time) [0 EEDERALEXPRESS- [ caused the evelops to be deliveredto ah authorized courier or driver authorized to réteive documents with delivery fees proyided for. [J (BY FACSIMILE} - I caused the above-described document(s) tobe transmitted to the offices of the interested partiesat the facsimile niimber(s). indicated on the attached Servioe List and the activity repori(s) generatedby facsimile number (509).581-6101 indicated all pages were transmitted. 0 (BY PERSONAL SERVICE) - | caused such envelope(s) to be delivered by hand to the offies(s) oftho addressee(s). Executed on September 8, 2017 ai Rancha Cueamanga, California. (STATE) - I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State ofCalifornia that the above istrue and correct. [J (FEDERAL) - | declare that I am employed in thieoff Eta inf jo bar of this court at whose direction the servicewas.made. A A INGTON v. VI Tos Augeles Superior Court-Case No.Ear Owr File No. 20351 SERVICE LIST Azariah M. Ellington Mitchell D. Ellington 10401 So, 4th Strect Inglewood, CA 90303 (310) 245-0711 IN PRO PER Marcus R, Ellington 13442-8, Budlong Avenue Gardena, CA 90247 {213)909-1531 IN PRO PER Timothy K, Ellington 13342 8. Budleng Avenue: Gardena, CA 90247 DEFENDANT IN PRO PER Kenneth R. Pivo, Esq. MyraA, Firlk, Esq. PIVQ, HALBREICH, MARTIN & WILSON LLP 525 N. Cabrillo ParkDrive, Suite 220 Santa Ana, Ca 92701 (714).619-2200- FAX (714) 619-2209 ATTORNEYS FOR KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS Vikram Brar, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF VIKRAM BRAR 700 N. Brand Blvd, Ste 970 Glendale, CA 91203-1258 (818) 242-9240 ~ FAX: (818) 242-9241 yikbrar@yahoo.com IN PRO PER Sarah L, Overton, Esq, CUMMINGS, MCCYL,OREY , DAVIS, ACHO & ASSOCIATES, P.E. 3801 University Ave, Suite 560 Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 276-4420 - FAX: (951) 276-4405 soverfon@emda-law.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS SUPERIORCOURT OFCALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELESAND COREY MCALLISTER Lawrence A, Cox; Iisq, Brian K., Condon, Esq, ARNOLD& PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP 777 South Figueroa Street, 44" Floor Laos Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 243-4000 - FAX (213)243-4199 ATTORNEYS FOR KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS 1 Steven J. Pearse, Esq. (SBN 272327) 2 COLLINS COLLINS MUIR + STEWART LLP ECTRONICALLY 1100 El Centro Street BECThCourtaf:LYFLED 3 {|South Pasadena, CA 91030 CduntyofOrange 4 ||(626)243-1100 - FAX (626) 243-1111 0947/2017 4t08:32:00Ph Clerk afthe‘SuperiorCourt 5 ||Attomeys for Defendants ‘Bye Clerk.Deputy:Clerc LISA FISHER and LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OFTHE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF ORANGE 10 11 ||AZARIAH M. ELLINGTON, MITCHELL D. ) CASE NO. BC639914 ELLINGTON, ) [Assigned to Hon. Sheila B. Fell, Dept. C25] 12 . ) Plaintiffs, ) NOTICE OF RULING 13 ) VS. ) Ml vikram BRAR,STATE OF ) 15 CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA APPELLATE) Transaction No.: 984412830 COURT, DAVID J. COWAN, MARIEE. ) Complaint Filed: 11/7/16 16 STRATTON, MARY THORNTON HOUSE, ) Trial Date: None {7 WILLIAM BARRY, DAVID S. ") CUNNINGHAM III, LOS ANGELES ) 18 ||[COUNTY, LOS ANGELES COUNTY ~~) SUPERIOR COURT, LISA FISHER, LAW ) 19 OFFICES OF LISA FISHER, COREY ) MCALLISTER, MARCUS R. ELLINGTON, ) 20 TIMOTHY K. ELLINGTON, KAISER ) 51 ||FOUNDATIONHOSPITALS and Does 1 ) through 100,inclusive, ) 22 ) Defendants. 23 ) 24 25 TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD HEREIN: 26 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT Defendants’, Lisa Fisher and Law Office of Lisa Fisher 97 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Fisher”), Special Motion to Strike (“Anti-SLAPP”) Azariah 28 |[M. Ellington's and Mitchell D. Ellington’s First Amended Complaint came for hearing on Mr+Stowartir 2151 pat 1 Ranche C CA Robert H. Stellwagen, Jr., Esq. (SBN 150590) #1730 Phome (906) 661-6100 NOTICE OF RULING ON ANTI-SLAPP MOTION N o N a S N h h A W N e N O N O R e m E m e d e m m k e d d k e m e k 27 28 Collins, Collins, Muir + Stewart LLP 10881 Foot Biv. Suite 260 Rancho ( CA N70 Phone (900) 681-6100 September 6, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. in Department C-25 of the Orange County Superior Court. For good cause shown, the Court adopted its tentative ruling and GRANTED Fisher's Anti-SLAPP Motion. Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is a true and correct copy ofthe tentative ruling. DATED: September 7, 2017 COLLINS COLLINS MUIR + STEWART LLP By: VEN J. PEARSE BERT J. STELLWAGEN,JR, Attorneys for Defendant, LISA FISHER and LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER 20354 2 NOTICE OF RULING ON ANTI-SLAPP MOTION EXHIBIT A Department C-25 Law and Motion - 09.06.17 No. 5 - Ellington v.Brar - BC639914 MOTION - Special Motion to Strike - Anti-SLAPP TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants’, Lisa Fisher and the Law Offices of Lisa Fisher, unopposed Special Motion to Strike plaintiffs First Amended Complaint is GRANTED. : N O 9 0 N N A N n h A W = - m k m k m k m b e d ed pm 2 2 2 B R B R B S S a a R SO R = 3 Oo 0O b u ou 27 28 Collins, Collins, Muir + Stewart LLp 10681 Foothil Bivd, Suite 200 Rancho C CA 7% Phone {904} 631-8100 es PROOF OF SERVICE (CCP gg 1013(a) and 2015.5; FRCP 5) State of California, ) ) ss County of San Bernardino, ) I am employed in the County ofLog Angeles, {am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 260, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, On this date, I served the foregoing document described as NOTICE OF RULING ON ANTI-STAPP MOTION on the interested parties in this action by placing same in a sealed envelope, addressed as follows: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST XX] (BY MAIL) - 1 caused such envelope(s) with postage thereon fully prepaid to be placed in the United States mall in Rancho Cucamonga, California to be served on the parties as indicated on the attached service list. I am “readily familiar” with the firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Rancho Cucamonga, California in the ordinary course of business, I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date ofdeposit for mailing in affidavit. (BY CERTIFIED MAIL) - I caused such envelope(s) with postage thereon fully prepaid via Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to be placed in the United States Mail in Rancho Cucamonga, California. BY EXPRESS MAIL ORANOTHERMETHOD OFDELIVERY PROVIDING FOROVERNIGHTDELIVERY (BY ELECTRONIC FILING AND/OR SERVICE)[ served a true copy, with all exhibits, electronically on designated recipients listed on the attached Service List on; (Date) at (Time) FEDERAL EXPRESS - [ caused the envelope to be delivered to an authorized courier or driver authorized to receive documents with delivery fees provided for, (BY FACSIMILE) - 1 caused the above-described document(s) to be transmitted to the offices of the interested parties at the facsimile number(s) indicated on the attached Service List and the activity report(s) generated by facsimile number (909) 581-6101 indicated all pages were transmitted, [1 (BY PERSONAL SERVICE) - I caused such envelope(s) to be delivered by hand to the office(s) ofthe addresscc(s). Executed on September 7, 2017 at Rancho Cucamonga, California, [ (STATE) - | declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws of the State ofCalifornia that the above is true and correct. [1] (FEDERAL) - I declare that | am employed in theZuam of bar ofthis court at whose direction the service was made. {JAROLDAN ™ 20331 3 NOTICE OF RULING ON ANTI-SLAPP MOTION O O N a N h h a W N BO m k w m m k m d e w p e je m j e m m N B R H R B R R EB ZZ ® 3 a a R S ee = = 28 Collins, Cokins, Mule + Stewart Lp 10881 Foothill Bivd, Sule 200 730 Phone (900) 541-6100 20351 AZARIAHM, ELLINGTON v. VIKRAM BRAR Los Angeles Superior Court - Case No. BC639914 Our File No. 20351 SERVICE LIST Azariah M., Ellington Mitchell D, Ellington 10401 So. 4th Street Inglewood, CA 90303 (310) 245-071] IN PRO PER Marcus R, Ellington 13442 S. Budlong Avenue Gardena, CA 90247 (213) 909-1531 IN PRO PER Timathy K, Ellington 13342 S. Budlong Avenue Gardena, CA 90247 DEFENDANT IN PRO PER Kenneth R. Pivo, Esq. Myra A. Firth, Esq. PIVO, HALBREICH, MARTIN & WILSON LLP 525 N. Cabrillo Park Drive, Suite 220 Santa Ana, Ca 92701 (714) 619-2200 -- FAX (714) 619-2209 ATTORNEYS FOR KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS 4 Vikram Brar,Esq. LAW OFFICE OF VIKRAM BRAR 700 N. Brand Blvd, Ste 970 Glendale, CA 91203-1258 (818) 242-9240 - FAX: (818) 242-9241 vikbrar@yahoo.com IN PRO PER Sarah L, Overton, Esq, CUMMINGS, MCCLOREY , DAVIS, ACHO & ASSOCIATES, P.E, 3801 University Ave,, Suite 560 Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 276-4420 - FAX:(951) 276-4405 soverton@cmda-law,com ATTORNEYSFOR DEFENDANTS SUPERIORCOURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AND COREY MCALLISTER Lawrence A. Cox, Esq. Brian K. Condon, Esq. ARNOLD & PORTERKAYE SCHOLER LLP 777 South Figueroa Street, 44 Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 243-4000 - FAX (213)243-4199 ATTORNEYS FOR KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS NOTICE OF RULING ON ANTI-SLAPP MOTION N e a A N E a W N | T E h k m d he m je m je m m k m k e k | on A 0 I ~ ~ 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart ur 1100 El Centro Street So, Pasadena, CA 91030 Phone (628) 243-1100 Fax (826) 243-4111 PROOF OF SERVICE (CCP g§ 1013(a) and 2015.5; FRCP 5) State of California, ) ) ss. County of San Bemardino. ) I am employed in the County ofLos Angeles. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 260, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. On this date, | served the foregoing document desctibed as NOTICE OF DEFENDANTS’ LISA FISHER AND LAW OFFICES OF LISA FISHER AMENDED SPECIAL MOTION AND SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIV. PROC. CODE SECT. 425.16; REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES; DECLARATION OF STEVEN J. PEARSE on the interested parties in this action by placing same in a sealed envelope, addressed as follows: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST DJ (BY MAIL) - I caused such envelope(s) with postage thereon fully prepaid to be placed in the United States mail in Rancho Cucamonga, California to be served on the parties as indicated on the attached service list. I am “readily familiar” with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing, Underthat practice,it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Rancho Cucamonga, California in the ordinary course of business, 1 am aware that on motion ofthe party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date ofdeposit for mailing in affidavit, (BY CERTIFIED MAIL) - I caused such envelope(s) with postage thereon fully prepaid via Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to be placed in the United States Mail in Rancho Cucamonga, California. BY EXPRESS MAIL OR ANOTHERMETHOD OF DELIVERY PROVIDING FOR OVERNIGHT DELIVERY (BY ELECTRONIC FILING AND/OR SERVICE) - I served a true copy, with all exhibits, electronically on designated recipients listed on the attached Service List on: {Date) at (Time) FEDERAL EXPRESS- I caused the envelope to be delivered to an authorized courier or driver authorized to receive documents with delivery fees provided for, (BY FACSIMILE) - I caused the above-described document(s) to be transmitted to the offices of the interested parties at the facsimile number(s) indicated on the attached Service List and the activity report(s) generated by facsimile number (909) 581-6101 indicated all pages were transmitted. [1 (BY PERSONAL SERVICE)- I caused such envelope(s) to be delivered by hand to the office(s)ofthe addressee(s). Executed on September 13, 2017 at Rancho Cucamonga, California, [X] (STATE) - I declare under penalty of perjury underthe laws of the State of California that the aboveis true and correct. [1] (FEDERAL) - I declare that I am employed in theaamember h&bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. 20351 13 MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES 0 3 S N h h E a W N N O N N O N N N N N O N O O N E E e m e m e m e m e m e w p m e m e m O S W N A W N e m S Y e e N n E e W N N e O o 28 Collins Collins Muir + Stewart Lp 1100 El Centro Street So, Pasadena, CA 81030 Phone (626) 243-1100 Fax (626) 243-1111 20351 AZARIAH M. ELLINGTON v. VIKRAM BRAR Los Angeles Superior Court - Case No. BC639914 Our File No. 20351 Azariah M.Ellington Mitchell D. Ellington 10401 So. 4th Street Inglewood, CA 90303 (310) 245-0711 IN PRO PER Marcus R.Ellington 13442 S. Budlong Avenue Gardena, CA 90247 (213) 909-1531 IN PRO PER Timothy K. Ellington 13342 S. Budlong Avenue Gardena, CA 90247 DEFENDANT IN PRO PER Kenneth R. Pivo, Esq. Myra A. Firth, Esq. PIVO, HALBREICH, MARTIN & WILSON LLP 525 N. Cabrillo Park Drive, Suite 220 Santa Ana, Ca 92701 (714) 619-2200 -- FAX (714) 619-2209 ATTORNEYS FOR KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS 14 SERVICE LIST Vikram Brar, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF VIKRAM BRAR 700 N. Brand Blvd., Ste 970 Glendale, CA 91203-1258 (818) 242-9240 - FAX: (818) 242-9241 vikbrar@yahoo.com IN PRO PER Sarah L. Overton, Esq. CUMMINGS, MCCLOREY , DAVIS, ACHO & ASSOCIATES, P.E. 3801 University Ave., Suite 560 Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 276-4420 - FAX: (951) 276-4405 soverton@cmda-law.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AND COREY MCALLISTER Lawrence A. Cox, Esq. Brian K. Condon, Esq. ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP 777 South Figueroa Street, 44™ Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 243-4000 - FAX (213)243-4199 ATTORNEYS FOR KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES