Fourth District, Division 1 Publishes Opinion on Unique Issue and Decides Equitable Principles Cannot Justify Fee Recovery.
Although one might chalk up this next one to an appellate court having fiscal savvy for the plights of cash-strapped governmental entities, we digest it so you make your own opinion on the result.
McGuigan v. City of San Diego, Case No. D055199 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 6, 2010 (certified for publication) decided that City, which aligned itself with plaintiff and against objectors in defending a class action settlement in which substantial attorney’s fees were awarded, was not also liable for attorney’s fees for plaintiff’s appellate successful work under CCP § 1021.5 (the private attorney general statute) primarily because City was not an “opposing party” under the fee-shifting statute. Beyond that, the Court of Appeal found there were no separate equitable bases for a fee award, refusing to buck the general state supreme court mandate in Serrano IV of not authorizing an award beyond the section 1021.5 dictates.