koszdin v. scif, 186 cal. app. 4th 480, what it means for attorney fees

by Justyn Nitzsche 5 min read

Overview

James M. Burgess is a trial lawyer and partner in the firm's Century City office.

Experience

A&J Liquor Co., et al. v. State Fund: Mr. Burgess was trial counsel for State Fund in this certified class action, which involved allegations of premium overcharging due to allegedly excessive reserves set by adjusters.

Honors

St. James Inn, Father Pat Traynor Award for exemplary community service, 2015.

Insights

"Unfair Competition Law Reform May Encourage Class Actions," Daily Journal (August 25, 2004). This article discusses the fact that the changes resulting from Proposition 64 might encourage some plaintiffs to file class actions

Memberships

Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, President (2018-Present), Secretary (2014-2018), Board Member (2013-present).

*485 Opinion

  • ZELON, J.— Appellants Kenton Koszdin and Gilbert Lipman (collectively Appellants) appeal from the trial court's judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of a demurrer for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Appellants are attorneys who represented injured workers in proceedings before the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). In six related class action complaint…
See more on courtlistener.com

I. The Class Action Complaints

  • Koszdin and Lipman are California licensed attorneys who practice before the WCAB. They filed six class action complaints in Los Angeles County Superior Court against six different defendants. Each defendant named in the complaints was either an employer or workers' compensation insurance carrier that allegedly failed to pay interest owed on attorney fee awards issued by the …
See more on courtlistener.com

II. The Demurrer to The Complaints

  • The cases were assigned for all purposes to Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Carl West in the complex litigation department. Pursuant to a stipulation between the parties, Respondents filed a joint demurrer to the complaints on jurisdictional and standing grounds. As to standing, Respondents contended that Appellants lacked standing to pursue claims for interest on their at…
See more on courtlistener.com

I. Standard of Review

  • In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint against a demurrer, we "treat[] the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded," but we do not "assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law." (Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist. (1992) 2 Cal. 4th 962, 967 [9 Cal. Rptr. 2d 92, 831 P.2d 317].) We liberally construe the pleading to achieve substantial justice …
See more on courtlistener.com

II. Standing

  • The first issue before this Court is one of standing. In their joint demurrer, Respondents contended that Appellants did not have standing to pursue claims for unpaid interest on their WCAB fee awards because all compensation must be paid directly to the injured worker unless otherwise ordered by the WCAB, and these awards did not direct the payment of any interest to t…
See more on courtlistener.com

III. Jurisdiction

  • (6) The second issue before this court is therefore one of jurisdiction. The trial court sustained the demurrer to Appellants' complaints on the ground that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction because the WCAB awards did not provide for the payment of interest. Appellants argue that their claims clearly fall within the jurisdiction of the superior court because section 5800 requires WC…
See more on courtlistener.com

*497 Disposition

  • The judgment is affirmed. Respondents shall recover their costs on appeal. Perluss, P.J., and Jackson, J., concurred.
See more on courtlistener.com

Notes

  • [*] Kenton Koszdin v. The Travelers Indemnity Co. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2009, No. BC393290); Gilbert Lipman v. Explorer Ins. Co. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2009, No. BC393291); Gilbert Lipman v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2009, No. BC393292); Kenton Koszdin v. Marriott Claims Services (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2009, No. BC393295); Gilbert Lipman v. Stater …
See more on courtlistener.com