Result Was To Affirm A $470,461.55 Fee And $15,511 Costs Awards.
Who says that fee and costs awards under California’s private attorney general statute cannot be substantial in nature? Surfrider Foundation v. Martins Beach 1, LLC, Case Nos. A1442681/A145176 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Aug. 9, 2017) (published) demonstrates they can, and frequently, are.
Nonprofit Surfrider Foundation, well known in this area, won a challenge to activities involving closure of public access before the owners obtained a coastal development permit, vindicating policies under the California Coastal Act. The trial judge awarded Surfrider $470,461.55 (out of a requested $609,176.93) in fees and $15,511 (full request) in costs. The opposition challenge to the fee award did not “score” on appeal.
Although this case is must reading for land use practitioners in the “takings” public trusts area, the 1/5 DCA found that (1) the Coastal Act policies being vindicated did constitute a public benefit; (2) a significant benefit of precedential value was obtained involving the interpretation of a “development” under the Coastal Act; (3) government was not concerned with the coastal development permit issue; and (4) Surfrider’s general nonpecuniary interest in protecting beach access did not disqualify it from section 1021.5 fee entitlement.