Du Bois v. Boskovich

Background

In February 2023, the court granted Defendant Anthony Boskovich’s motion to strike under California’s anti-SLAPP statute. An anti-SLAPP motion is a request to dismiss claims targeting protected speech or petitioning activity. Because Boskovich prevailed on that motion, he asked for attorneys’ fees under California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c)(1).

Plaintiff Bekah Du Bois said she could not afford to pay attorneys’ fees. She also argued that Boskovich did not personally have to pay the fees because malpractice insurance covered them, and that the court should use the $200 hourly rate his lawyer actually billed rather than the requested $450 rate.

Fee calculation

The court explained that an award of fees to a prevailing defendant under California’s anti-SLAPP statute is mandatory. It therefore found no authority allowing it to deny fees based on Du Bois’s ability to pay. The court instead considered whether the requested fees were reasonable.

The court used the lodestar method, which calculates fees by multiplying the reasonable number of hours by a reasonable hourly rate. Boskovich’s lawyer claimed 34.3 hours: 28 hours for researching and drafting the anti-SLAPP motion, 3.8 hours for preparing the fee motion, and about 2.5 additional hours for reviewing and responding to Du Bois’s opposition. At the requested rate of $450 per hour, Boskovich sought $15,435.

The court found that the 34.3 hours were reasonable and that the work was performed efficiently. It rejected the argument that the reasonable market rate had to equal the amount actually billed, but found that Boskovich had not adequately supported a $450 hourly rate. The court described the case as a straightforward application of the anti-SLAPP statute and found that $200 per hour was reasonable under the circumstances.

Ruling

The court granted in part and denied in part Boskovich’s motion for attorneys’ fees. It awarded Boskovich $6,860, calculated as 34.3 hours multiplied by $200 per hour.