What is the test for reversal of an award for attorney fees?

rendered in its court, and while its judgment is subject to our review, we will not disturb that determination unless we are convinced that it is clearly wrong. [Citations.] The only proper basis of reversal of the amount of an attorney fees award is if the amount awarded is so large or small that it shocks the conscience and suggests that passion and prejudice influenced the determination." (Akins v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 1127, 1134; In re Tobacco Cases I (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 570, 587.)

b. The record does not establish an abuse of discretion

The Association contends the trial court committed reversible error by diverging from the lodestar formula. It emphasizes that the court reduced the award by nearly 70 percent from the requested lodestar figure, and stresses that the court "did not state whether it made its own calculation of the lodestar," "did not explain the reasons for reducing [the Association's] lodestar request," and "did not articulate its findings on the elements of the fee award." The argument seeks to exploit silence in the record to establish reversible error. Our standard of review mandates the opposite presumption. (See Ketchum, supra, 24 Cal.4th at pp. 1140-1141 [appellate courts presume the trial court's decision is correct when the record is silent; the appellant has the burden of showing an abuse of discretion by affirmatively demonstrating error]; Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.)