Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Private Attorney General Statute: Second District, Division 6 Issues Interesting CCP § 1021.5 Apportionment Decision

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Appellate Court Remands Total Fee Denial Decision, Finding One Aspect of Case Meets Standards for Private Attorney General Fee Recovery.      Wilson v. San Luis Obispo County Democratic Central Comm., Case No. B224269 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Feb. 14, 2011) (certified for publication) is an interesting allocation decision in the private attorney general statute (Code […]

Private Attorney General Statute: Cypress Marina Heights Decision of January 10, 2011 Is Now Published

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Sixth District Certifies Decision for Publication.      In our January 10, 2011 post on Monterey/Santa Cruz Building, etc. v. Cypress Marina Heights, Case No. H034143 (6th Dist. Jan. 10, 2011), we reviewed a decision awarding attorney’s fees under the private attorney general doctrine in a construction prevailing wage ruling for 900 benefitted construction workers. We

Private Attorney General Statute: $73,167.50 Worker Prevailing Wage Construction Fee Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Sixth District Finds that Construction Prevailing Wage Ruling For 900 Construction Workers Met CCP § 1021.5 Requisites.      Monterey/Santa Cruz County Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council v. Cypress Marina Heights LP, Case No. H034143 (6th Dist. Jan. 10, 2011) (unpublished) involved a situation where plaintiffs won a proceeding against a defendant which acquired Ford Ord

Class Actions/Civil Rights/Private Attorney General/Settlements: California Lawyer Article Explores Negotiation Of Attorney’s Fees In Public Agency Cases

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Settlement

  Concurrent Negotiation of Substantive Relief and Fees in Public Agency Cases Is Allowable.      Adam W. Hofmann, an attorney in the San Francisco office of Hanson Bridgett, has written an article entitled “Negotiating Attorneys Fees” in the January 2011 edition of The California Lawyer. In it, he explains that California cases expressly reject any

Substantiation Of Fees And Private Attorney General Statute: $1,007,067 Fee Award Gets Scaled Down To $669,525 On Appeal

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Lack of Supporting Proof For Certain Time Frame Dictates Fee Reduction.      Defendant won an unusual unreasonable restraint on alienation battle over a buffer zone, leading the trial court to award fees of $1,007,067 under California’s private attorney general statute (Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5) in Greenlaw Grupe, Jr. Operating Co. v. Land

Year End Wrap-Up: Mike & Marc’s Top 20 Attorney’s Decision Fees Decisions–Part 2 of 2.

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Costs, Cases: Experts, Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Retainer Agreements, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

     Here is the second installment of our top 20 decisions.      10. Jankey v. Lee, 181 Cal.App.4th 1173 (1st Dist., Div. 4 2010), review granted, No. S180890 (May 12, 2010) — authored by Presiding Justice Ruvolo; discussed in our Feb. 6, 2010 post.      Attorney’s fees are awardable to a prevailing defendant under Civil

Private Attorney General Statute: Winning District Supervisor Entitled As A Matter of Law To Award Of Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Second District, Division 6 Reverses Lower Court Denial of Fees.      Doreen Farr and Steven Pappas were candidates for the third district supervisor in Santa Barbara County. Ms. Farr was elected, and Mr. Pappas unsuccessfully contested the election pursuant to Elections Code section 16100(d), (f). Ms. Farr made a motion for attorney’s fees in

In The News . . . . Judge Tentatively Awards $125,000 In Attorney’s Fees To Nonprofit Group And Against Caltrans

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), In The News

  Fee Award for Dispute Involving EIR on Cold Spring Canyon Bridge.      As reported on December 15, 2010 by the Indy Staff on the Santa Barbara Independent.com, Judge Thomas Anderle tentatively awarded Friends of the Bridge attorney’s fees of $125,000 in a dispute against Caltrans involving deficiencies in a final EIR relating to Cold

Private Attorney General Statute: Appellate Court Affirms Denial Of Attorney’s Fees To Petitioner Winning An Auditing Reallocation of Oakland Measure Y Funds

Cases: Common Fund, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Neither Private Attorney General or Common Fund Doctrines Justified Fee Award.       Sacks v. City of Oakland, Case Nos. A126781/A126817 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 10, 2010) (certified for partial publication; fee discussion not published) involved a petitioner who, at the trial court level, won a mandate writ regarding the allocation and use of tax

Private Attorney General Statute: First District, Division 5 Finds It Can Resolve Significant Benefit Issue Itself But That Other Issues Need To Be Remanded For Resolution

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  $6 Million Fee Award Will Be Reassessed.       For all of your folks involved in public interest cases, the next decision is a good one to review in the private attorney general fee area.      Environmental Protection Information Center v. California Dept. of Forestry and Fire Protection, Case Nos. A108410/A108478 (1st Dist., Div. 5

Scroll to Top