In Serrano v. Priest (1977) 20 Cal. 3d 25, the Supreme Court held that the seven factors the trial court took into consideration to determine whether to augment or diminish the lodestar amount were appropriate in light of the circumstances of the case, 8 deferring to the discretion of the trial judge. "The 'experienced trial judge is the best judge of the value of professional services rendered in his court, and while his judgment is of course subject to review, it will not be disturbed unless the appellate court is convinced that it is clearly wrong.' " (Serrano, supra, 20 Cal. 3d at p. 49) The Serrano court identified the following seven factors as "among" the relevant factors the trial court took into consideration: "(1) the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill displayed in presenting them; (2) the extent to which the nature of the litigation precluded other employment by the attorneys; (3) the contingent nature of the fee award, both from the point of view of eventual victory on the merits and the point of view of establishing eligibility for an award; (4) the fact that an award against the state would ultimately fall upon the taxpayers; (5) the fact that the attorneys in question received public and charitable funding for the purpose of bringing law suits of the character here involved; (6) the fact that the monies awarded would inure not to the individual benefit of the attorneys involved but the organizations by which they are employed; (7) the fact that in the court's view the two law firms involved had approximately an equal share in the success of the litigation." (Serrano, supra, 20 Cal. 3d at p. 49.)