Facts

Hillel Chodos represented Navabeh P. Borman in a Marvin action and in a dissolution proceeding. He had no fee agreement so his claim was for quantum meruit. Chodos did not have billing records, so he estimated his time at 1,500 hours. On behalf of Borman, Chodos settled the Marvin action for certain assets and cash with a value of approximately $26 million. Defendant heavily contested this.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Chodos contended that the general value of his time is $1,000 per hour. He asked for an enhancement of six times his hourly rate because of the difficulty of the underlying matter, the fact that he was not paid as he was performing the work, and for the result obtained.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Borman contended that Chodos could not substantiate and verify his hours. Borman further contended that the underlying case was not overly complex, difficult, and impossible to win as claimed by Chodos. Borman contended that the underlying settlement is not worth $26 million because the vast majority of the settlement is composed of assets, which have not been sold/liquidated and, therefore, cannot be valued. Borman alleges that Chodos engaged in numerous ethical breaches and violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to have a written fee agreement and failing to charge a conscionable fee. Defendant contended that Chodos was not entitled to a multiplier of 5 times his alleged hourly rate of $1,000.00.

Settlement Discussions

Defendant had offered $500,000 in a CCP 998 offer shortly before trial. Plaintiff did not counter.

Result

Plaintiff's verdict for $7.8 million. The jury found in favor of Chodos and awarded him at the rate of $5,000 per hour.

Other Information

The trial court issued a stay pending appeal of enforcement of the judgment. The jury multiplier is the subject of the current appeal. The case has numerous legal issues of first impression and the appeal is contesting this runaway jury verdict. The trial court made numerous legal rulings that are also the subject of the appeal. Finally, the plaintiff has a policy of not providing a written fee agreement which is also the subject of this appeal. FILING DATE: April 1, 2010.

Deliberation

45 minutes

Poll

12-0

Length

10 hours