Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Substantial Evidence Was The Review Standard, So The Factual Finding Submarined A Catalyst Theory Challenge On Appeal.                In Costeaux French Bakery, Inc. v. County of Sonoma, Case No. A166727 (1st Dist., Div. 5 May 8, 2024) (unpublished), plaintiff sought private attorney general’s fees under a catalyst theory.  What basically happened was that the County […]

Plain Meaning Of Section 1021.5 Supported The District Court’s Denial Of Fees To Plaintiff Agency.                In Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency v. Whittaker Corp., Case No. 22-55727 (9th Cir. Apr. 15, 2024) (published), plaintiff water agency certainly prevailed against defendant company upon various torts and CERCLA based on alleged groundwater contamination.  Agency moved for

Significant Benefit Element Of Private Attorney General Statute Was Not Satisfied.                Nonprofit petitioner in The Affordable Housing Coalition of San Diego County v. Drager, Case No. C097016 (3d Dist. Mar. 11, 2024) (unpublished) brought a wide range of claims against governmental entities, obtaining limited relief on payment of loan reporting requirements with respect to

Plaintiff’s Financial Incentive, That Far Outweighed The Incurred Costs Of Litigation, Warranted Denial Of Fees, And Plaintiff’s Analysis of Heron Bay Did Not Change That Factor.             Recovery of attorney fees under California’s private attorney general doctrine, codified at CCP § 1021.5, is reserved for “litigants and attorneys who step forward to engage in public

Insured Did Vindicate Important Rights For California Insureds By Obtaining Published Affirmance Of An Insured’s Right To Videotape Insurer’s Participants In An EUO.             In Myasnyankin v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., Case No. A166946 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Jan. 30, 2024) (partially published), by a 2-1 vote, the appellate court affirmed a lower court’s determination

If Analysis Was OK, Nothing Wrong With The Amount Of The $582,927 Award.             In Grossmont Union High School Dist. v. Diego Plus Education Corp., Case No. D080295 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 29, 2023) (published), a trial court determined that a school district should pay private attorney general fees to charter schools for prevailing

Appellate Court Found That Private Attorney General Elements Were Met, Having Good Discussions Of The “Opposing Party,” Public Interest, And Interests of Justice Requirements.             In City of Fresno v. Fresno Building Healthy Communities, et al., Case Nos. F084662/F084666 (5th Dist. Dec. 26, 2023) (unpublished), a nonprofit defendant/petitioner Fresno Building Healthy Communities (FBHC) was denied