Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Lodestar/Multiplier/Private Attorney General/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Catalyst Theory Fee Recovery Against Gambling Control Commission Affirmed, But Strikes Multiplier For “Fees On Fees” Work On Amount Of Fees

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

  Reconstructed Time Sheet Evidence Went Only to Weight, Not Admissibility Of Fee Submissions.      In Cates v. John Chiang, as State Controller, Case No. D060570 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 7, 2013) (published), plaintiff received $2,011,844 in fees under a private attorney general “catalyst theory” (lodestar at a blended hourly rate of $451 for […]

Private Attorney General: Fee Recovery Denial Based On Financial Stake Prong Of CCP § 1021.5 Sustained On Appeal

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

       Aegis Medical Systems, Inc. v. Zitto, Case No. A134907 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Jan. 28, 2013) (unpublished) was not a hard one to decide at either or the appellate court level, apparently. Although plaintiff did prevail on a drug treatment “underground regulation” issue, the problem was that plaintiff had a huge financial incentive

Private Attorney General: $316,622.74 Fee Award Reversed Because Nonprofit Must Show Its Organizational Members Lacked A Financial Stake

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

       Although the decision actually involves interesting issues about the constitutionality of legislative enactments relating to redevelopment agencies, Cal. Redevelopment Assn. v. Matosantos, Case No. C064907 (3d Dist. Jan. 24, 2013) (published) did hold that a $315,622.74 fee recovery under California’s private attorney general statute had to be reversed. Reason? The financial burden element

Private Attorney General: Home Builders Association’s Fee Recovery Sustained In Substantial Part

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  $1,800 For Unexplained Counsel Time to File Complaint Reduced From Fee Award.      Building Assn. of the Bay Area v. City of Santa Rosa, Case No. A132839 (1st Dist., Div. 5) (Jan. 15, 2013) (unpublished) involved a lower court’s fee award to a builders association invalidating an ordinance requiring property owners to waive their

Private Attorney General: Amateur Radio Hobby Plaintiff Winning Constitutional Vagueness Challenge To Palmdale Ordinance Entitled to 1021.5 Fees

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Lower Court’s Denial of Fees on Personal Interest Prong Was Reversed.      In Zubarau v. City of Palmdale, Case No. 236406 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Jan. 17, 2013) (unpublished), plaintiff–who was an amateur radio enthusiast–challenged a Palmdale zoning ordinance regulating approval of his application to construct a tower antenna at his home. He lost

Private Attorney General Statute: Inadequate Record And Failure To Prevail Dooms Vexatious Litigant’s Appeal

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

       Plaintiff, a vexatious litigant, appealed a trial court’s denial of his fee request under CCP § 1021.5, California’s attorney general statute, after he lost a bid to overturn a Nevada judgment on the grounds it was fraudulently procured.      Plaintiff lost his appeal of the fee denial in Missud v. D.R. Horton, Inc.,

Private Attorney General: School Districts/Community College Districts Do Not Satisfy “Financial Burden” Element of CCP § 1021.5

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Plaintiffs Had Financial Incentive Aplenty In Challenging Contemporaneous Source Document Rule.      Plaintiffs, school districts and community colleges, successfully challenged the “contemporaneous source document rule” (guidelines used to audit employee salary and benefit costs in reimbursement claims) as an invalid regulation under the state Administrative Procedure Act.      Plaintiffs then moved for an award

Private Attorney General (CCP §1021.5): Winning Nonprofit Entites Entitled To Postjudgment 1021.5 Fees Totaling $45,555.50

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Plaintiffs Appealed on Significant CEQA Fire Impacts, Quino Protection, and Water Supply Impacts Issues.      Plaintiffs in Preserve Wild Santee v. City of Santee, Case Nos. D055215/D061030 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 19, 2012) (published) certainly deserve accolades for hanging in there and prevailing on CEQA challenges to fire impacts, Quino protection, and water

Private Attorney General: Plaintiffs Losing Election Write-In Ballot Lawsuit Lost Bid For Fees And Potentially Liable For Intervenor Fees Of Almost $250,000

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Case Still Pending, With Motion for Reconsideration Arguing Against “Chill” From Ultimate Result.      Field v. Bowen, Case No. CGC-10-502018 (San Francisco Super. Ct. Aug. 1, 2012) is an interesting superior court decision in an election ballot write-in dispute eventually lost by plaintiff after a prior published appellate decision and then adverse decision on

Scroll to Top