Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Private Attorney General: Fee Award To Plaintiffs In State Water Board Proceeding Reversed Regarding Work On Prior Published Appeal

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Plaintiffs Failed To Satisfy Financial Burdens Elements of CCP § 1021 Analysis.     Plaintiffs successfully challenged a State Water Resources Control Board cease and desist order (CDO) in a water diversion case, which resulted in an affirmance in favor of plaintiffs in a prior published decision.  Based on that result, plaintiffs moved to recover […]

Private Attorney General: Nonprofit Plaintiff Suspended Corporation During Short-Framed Validation Action Denied Private Attorney General Fees Under CCP § 1021.5 Where Suspension Not Disclosed To Trial Court Or Opponent

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  First Impression Issue, But Unique Circumstances, Required Reversal Of Fee Grant Involving Substantial Fee Recovery To Nonprofit.      This case shows how unique factual circumstances can drive cases, especially in the attorney’s fees recovery area of the law. Hold on, this is a wild ride but not necessarily given the unique factual circumstances involved.

Private Attorney General: $722,000 Fee Award Upheld Where Litigant Successfully Challenged City’s Referral Of Initial Parking Citation Review To Outside Agency

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Lower Court Fee Award Affirmed, An Award We Reviewed Earlier.      In our March 6, 2015 post, we discussed a private attorney general fee award of a little shy of $722,000 to Mr. Weiss in a case where he successfully challenged the City of Los Angeles’ delegation of initial review of parking citations to

Private Attorney General: $296,100 Fee Award To Class Plaintiffs Affirmed In Case Where Trial Court Ordered California Highway Patrol To Comply With Arrest Detention Requirement

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Significant Benefit Conferred When Law Enforcement Agencies Are Ordered To Implement The Law Correctly.      In Schmidt v. California Highway Patrol, Case No. B260643 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Aug. 1, 2016) (published), a class was certified and a writ petition granted in a case to compel the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to comply with Penal

Private Attorney General: $134,417 Fee Award In Favor Of Exotic Animal Nonprofit For Denial Of Breeding Zoo Waiver Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Both Sides Appealed, But Lower Court Award Affirmed.     Above:  Col. Roosevelt, Tarlton, and the big lion. Photographer:  Kermit Roosevelt.  c1919.  Library of Congress.      Exotic Feline Breeding Compound v. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Case No. F070449 (5th Dist. June 22, 2016) (unpublished) involved the Department of Fish and Wildlife’s appeal of a

Private Attorney General: Plaintiff Denied Fee Recovery As Catalyst In Nonconforming Singular Traffic Sign Case

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  $70,000 Fee Request Rebuffed By Trial And Appellate Courts.     In Hillis v. City of Aliso Viejo, Case No. G051900 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 2, 2016) (unpublished), plaintiff successfully contested a nonconforming traffic sign infraction against City, obtaining a dismissal of a criminal charge.  Plaintiff’s father asked the City to remove the offensive

Appealability/Private Attorney General: Denial Of Private Attorney General Fee Recovery For Traffic Infraction Partial Win Was Proper Because Appeal Did Not Affect Winner’s Substantial Rights

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Traffic Infraction Winners May Face Hard Road to Hoe As Far As Fee Recovery.     In Gray v. Superior Court, Case No. B269150 (2d Dist., Div. 3 May 31, 2016) (published), a person failing to stop at a red light partially won an automated camera traffic enforcement challenge, with the person filing to recovery

Prevailing Party, Private Attorney General, Section 998, Section 1717: Neither Borrower Winning $523.14 Nor Lender With Beating 998 Offers Were Deemed Prevailing Parties

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

  Both Went Away Unhappy, We Assume.     In Russo v. Bank of America, Case No. D067623 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 17, 2016) (unpublished), borrower and lender won some sides of claims in an impound dispute, although plaintiff borrower eventually won $523.14 based on a contract with a fees clause after seeking $795,000 plus

Private Attorney General: Intervening Parties Whose Involvement In Suit Did Not Materially Contribute Beyond Public Entity-Affiliated Litigants Denied A Substantial Fee Request Under CCP § 1021.5

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Fee Request of Over $1.785 Million Denied In Entirety.     For intervening parties in suits with potential fee recovery in CCP § 1021.5 cases, San Diego Municipal Employees Assn. v. City of San Diego, Case No. D066886 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 9, 2016) (published) is a stark reminder that you must bring something

Private Attorney General: $250,000 Fee Award To Prevailing Plaintiff Affirmed, But Remanded For Redetermination Of Whether Negative Multiplier Was Warranted For Only “Partial Success” And Whether “Fees On Fees” Cut Justified

Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Need For More Expensive Out-Of-Venue Counsel Was Well Justified By Fee Claimant.      In Habitat and Watershed Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz, Case No. H040762 (6th Dist. Oct. 6, 2015) (unpublished), both plaintiff and City appealed a lower court’s decision awarding plaintiff fees of about $250,000 (out of a requested $486,800 on the

Scroll to Top