Fourth District, Division 1 Determines Denial of RFA Fees Was Abuse of Discretion and Needed Another Look.
In our category “Requests for Admissions,” we have surveyed past decisions which have considered Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.420, which authorizes a trial court to award attorney’s fees and costs to litigants having to incur expenses to prove the truth of denied requests for admissions at a subsequent trial. In the next case, an appellate court actually reversed a denial of fees and remanded for further proceedings to determine if fees were justified in the RFA context.
Pacific Torrey Reserve Holdings, LP v. City of San Diego, Case No. D052390 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 17, 2009) (unpublished) involved review of a trial court’s denial of a litigant request to recover fees and costs incurred to prove the truth of 6 RFAs denied by the City of San Diego after the litigant prevailed in a declaratory relief action. Believe it or not, the appellate court found the lower court abused its discretion in denying the fee request and remanded for further proceedings.
Although acknowledging that the denial order was reviewed under an abuse of discretion review standard, Laabs v. City of Victorville, 163 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1275-1276 (2008), the Court of Appeal nevertheless found the denial was unreasonable under the circumstances. The facts showed that the City did not make a reasonable investigation by failing to discover a 1993 City memo and failing to consult with a City staff member before denying certain RFAs. The lower court failed to focus on these missteps by City, requiring reversal. (Brooks v. American Broadcasting Co., 179 Cal.App.3d 500, 510 (1986).) However, on remand, the appellate panel did indicate that the trial court should consider the other party’s actions—namely, why plaintiff did not confront the City with the 1993 memo earlier or try to resolve the discovery dispute by presentation of the information showing unreasonable investigation by the City. (Ibid.)
The end result: the matter was remanded to the trial court to weigh the reasonableness of each side’s conduct in the case of the RFA denial battle.