Special Set Tentative Rulings

The following tentative rulings will become the ruling of the Court unless a party desires to be heard.  If you desire to appear and present oral argument as to any motion, YOU MUST notify the Court by telephone at (707) 521-6604, and all other opposing parties of your intent to appear by 4:00 p.m. the court day immediately before the day of the hearing.

TO JOIN ZOOM ONLINE:

• Meeting ID:160 739 4368
• Passcode: 000169

TO JOIN ZOOM BY PHONE: 

• By Phone (use the Meeting ID and Password listed above):
• +1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)

1.         23CV00463, Subway Real Estate, LLC v. Sandhu: Attorney’s Fees

Plaintiff Subway Real Estate, LLC (“Plaintiff”) moves pursuant to Civil Code section 1717 and C.C.P. section 1032 for attorneys’ fees and costs in the total amount of $41,873.63 against Defendant Rajveer Sandhu (“Defendant”). The motion is GRANTED for $36,323.40 for attorneys’ fees and $4,620.23 for costs, totaling $40,943.63.

Procedural History

This action arises from a breach of contract from Defendant’s failure to pay rent pursuant to a sublease he entered into for the operation of a Subway restaurant at 1405 Fulton Road, #103, Santa Rosa, California 95403. (MPA in Support of Motion, 3:3–7.) On November 6, 2024, this Court held trial and entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff for $50,000.00. (Id. at 3:15–17.) On January 8, 2025, the Court also granted Subway’s motion for prejudgment interest in the amount of $5,000.00. (See Judgment on Court Verdict, filed January 28, 2025.) Plaintiff now moves for attorneys’ fees on the basis that the sublease between the Parties allows for such recovery.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees

Civil Code section 1717 governs the award of attorney’s fees and costs where the contract specifically provides that attorney’s fees and costs shall be awarded to either one of the parties or the “prevailing party.” “The prevailing party determination is to be made only upon final resolution of the contract claims and only by ‘a comparison of the extent to which each party ha[s] succeeded and failed to succeed in its contentions.’” (Mustachio v. Great W. Bank (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1145, 1150 citing Hsu v. Abbara (1995) 9 Cal.4th 863, 876.) Code of Civil Procedure section 1032 provides that attorney’s fees are an allowable cost when authorized by contract, statute, or law. (C.C.P. § 1033.5(a)(10)(B).)

Here, Defendant assumed the sublease on February 24, 2015, binding him to the terms of the sublease. (Chung Declaration, Exhibit B, pp. 48/180.) Subsection 6 of the sublease states that “The Sublessee agrees to pay the Sublessor upon demand, as additional rent, any fees, costs or charges, including attorneys’ fees and legal costs, incurred by the Sublessor in enforcing any of the terms or provisions of this sublease, including without limitation for collecting any unpaid or late rental amounts or eviction proceedings.” (Chung Declaration, Exhibit C, pp. 120/180.) Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable fees because it is the prevailing party in the action as the Court entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s counsel requests attorneys’ fees to be awarded at the following rates totaling $35,703.40:

1. For Counsel Chung, $310 per hour (for work completed in 2022) and $325 per hour (for work completed in 2023–2024),
2. For Counsel Parascandola, $310 per hour (for work completed in 2022 as Senior Counsel) and $360 per hour (for work completed in 2023–2024 as Partner),
3. For Investigator C. Esters at $160 per hour, and
4. For Paralegal V. Andreassen at $165 per hour.

In support of the fee request, Plaintiff’s counsel has attached detailed billing records reflecting attorney and staff hours and corresponding rates for work done on behalf of Plaintiff. (See Chung Declaration, Exhibit E.) Plaintiff further requests an additional $1,550 in attorneys’ fees for 5 hours of work at $310 per hour for preparing the instant motion, reviewing Plaintiff’s Opposition, preparing the Reply, and appearing in Court (Chung Declaration, ¶ 12.) Plaintiff also requests a total of $4,620.23 in costs, as stated in Plaintiff’s memorandum of costs filed May 14, 2025.

The Court finds the hours and rates proposed by Plaintiff to be reasonable for Sonoma County and well-supported by billing records submitted as evidence. However, the Court does not award anticipatory fees and most notably, there was no Opposition or Reply filed in connection with this motion. The Court will award an additional $620 (2 hours of work at $610) totaling $36,323.40 for attorneys’ fees.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs is GRANTED for the amount of $36,323.40 for attorneys’ fees and $4,620.23 for costs. Plaintiff’s counsel shall submit a written order on the motion to the Court consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule of Court 3.1312(a) and (b).

***This is the end of the Tentative Rulings***