Civil Harassment Proceeding Was the Context
Due process, due process, that concept drove the striking of an attorney’s fees award in a civil harassment proceeding context.
In Bridges v. Smith, Case No. C074704 (3d Dist. Feb. 23, 2015) (unpublished), plaintiffs were granted a 5-year civil harassment restraining order to stop defendant’s alleged harassment of them under CCP § 527.6, along with costs. The judge making these rulings retired, and the new judge confirmed his rulings but also granted plaintiffs $5,050 in fees under the civil harassment fee-shifting statute.
The appellate court determined that the new judge could not enter a judgment with the additional fee recovery—after all, the retired judge didn’t do it and due process was a “stickler” dictating the result in defendant’s favor.