Noerr-Pennington Challenge Once Again Rebuked in SLAPP Fee Area.
In The Petersen Law Firm v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. B220030 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Apr. 13, 2011) (unpublished), The Petersen Law Firm was SLAPPed in state court for bringing an unsuccessful mandate petition to force compliance with certain police department statutory provisions and policies, after the case was remanded by federal court in the wake of a prior removal by City of Los Angeles and other defendants. (The federal court, in remanding, did not decide a SLAPP motion filed by the defense before the case went back to state court.) The state trial court subsequently awarded defendants attorney’s fees of $25,000 (out of a requested $52,278) and costs of $1,500 (out of a requested $2,715.10), with no reasoning for making the reductions. The law firm appealed the SLAPP and fee orders, while defendants cross-appealed the fee reduction.
The law firm lost its appeal. The principal argument was that the fee award was barred by the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, but that doctrine was found inapposite for reasons expressed in a prior recent unpublished decision from Division 3. (See Ruttlen v. County of Los Angeles, Case No, B223345 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 30, 2011) (unpublished) [reviewed in our March 31, 2011 post].)
Defendants fared better on appeal. Because the law firm raised no objections to specific hours spent in the fee request, the appellate court remanded to have the trial court specify why the fee request was reduced. It may have been that the lower court reduced for duplicative defense work in filing the federal SLAPP motion, but the reviewing court did not want to speculate one way or the other. So, defendants may have opportunity to recoup more fees upon remand in this one.