Catalyst Theory is No Alternative, Because Mandate Win Was Judicial Determination.
A director of a nonprofit public benefit corporation involving horses for disabled students successfully won a mandate proceeding in court by which she beat the board’s attempt to exclude her from a board meeting. She then moved for recovery of private attorney general fees under CCP § 1021.5, a request which was denied.
Her appeal did not change the result.
In Soules v. Hoofprints on the Heart Adaptive Riding Center, Case No. A138340 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Dec. 5, 2013) (unpublished), the reviewing court agreed with the conclusion that her exclusion victory did not satisfy the public interest or significant benefit requirements of section 1021.5. Alternatively, she argued that the “catalyst theory” was a predicate for recovery, but this contention failed because it only applies to a resolution caused by means other than a judicial determination–with the mandate win making this theory inapplicable.
Washington society youngsters impersonate “Horse Marines” at children’s horse show. 1928. Library of Congress.
