Mogan v. Sacks, Ricketts & Case LLP

Background

Michael Mogan, an attorney licensed in California, sued Airbnb Inc., three Airbnb employees, Sacks, Ricketts & Case LLP, and two attorneys associated with that firm. The claims concerned a sanction against Mogan in an earlier state-court action.

The court had previously granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss. It also granted the Airbnb Defendants’ motion for sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, finding that Mogan had filed a frivolous complaint and that reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs were an appropriate sanction. The court directed the Airbnb Defendants and the SRC Defendants to file separate motions addressing the amounts of their fees.

Airbnb Defendants’ Motion

The Airbnb Defendants requested $185,092.40 in attorneys’ fees and costs. The court evaluated the request under the lodestar method, which generally involves multiplying reasonable hours by reasonable hourly rates.

The court found the rates requested for Damali Taylor and Jennifer Cardelús reasonable. It found that Airbnb had not provided enough information to establish that Kelly Kambourelis’s requested rates were reasonable, so it set Kambourelis’s reasonable rate at $450 per hour.

The court generally found the claimed hours reasonable. It excluded 3.8 hours Taylor billed for matters identified as “MCCLUSKY” rather than “MOGAN,” because Airbnb did not explain how those hours related to Mogan’s case. The court rejected Mogan’s argument that Airbnb should have reduced its expenses by contacting him before filing the sanctions motion.

The court found that Airbnb’s declarations and itemized billing records were sufficient evidence. It overruled Mogan’s objections to the supporting materials and denied his requests for an evidentiary hearing and supplemental briefing.

Mogan also argued that he could not pay the sanctions. The court found that his declaration, which was based on information and belief and discussed his accounts, properties, and debts, did not provide enough evidence to prevent an award of reasonable fees and costs.

The court awarded the Airbnb Defendants $162,160.20 in attorneys’ fees and $573.90 in costs.

SRC Defendants’ Motion

The SRC Defendants requested $16,399.00 in attorneys’ fees for work related to their successful motion under California’s anti-SLAPP statute. Anti-SLAPP laws provide a procedure for challenging certain lawsuits based on protected speech or petitioning activity and may allow a prevailing defendant to recover fees.

Mogan argued that the anti-SLAPP statute did not apply in federal court under the Supreme Court’s decision in Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co. The court rejected that argument, relying on Ninth Circuit decisions and district-court decisions awarding fees after successful anti-SLAPP motions in federal court.

The court also rejected Mogan’s argument that the SRC Defendants’ billing records were too vague. It found that the requested 71.3 hours were limited to anti-SLAPP-related work, including researching and preparing the motion, reviewing Mogan’s opposition, and drafting the reply. The court found the $230 hourly rate and the hours reasonable and granted the SRC Defendants’ request for $16,399.00 in attorneys’ fees.

Disposition

The court GRANTED the Airbnb Defendants’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and awarded them $162,160.20 in attorneys’ fees and $573.90 in costs. The court GRANTED the SRC Defendants’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and awarded them $16,399.00. The court also overruled Mogan’s objections and DENIED his request for an evidentiary hearing and supplemental briefing.