Fourth District, Division Three Finds Plaintiffs Were Not Catalysts For Change So As To Be Entitled to Fees.
Our fellow blawg “Cal Biz Lit” has an interesting post on November 21, 2008, discussing our local Fourth District, Division Three’s unpublished opinion in Cohn v. Corinthian Colleges, Inc., Case No. G038388 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 21, 2008) (unpublished). We will not repeat his excellent discussion, except to note that Justice O’Leary—writing for a 3-0 panel—did not agree that plaintiffs, losers of a challenge to the Angel’s Mother’s Day totebag giveaway to females 18 years and over, were entitled to an award of fees under the Unruh Act’s fee-shifting provision even though the Angels voluntarily changed the policy to give bags to everyone in order to avoid future nuisance suits. Changing activity to avoid nuisance suits—given that the Angels beat the challenge so that the “agony of defeat” was not a specter—did not justify a fee award under the “catalyst” theory. (See Graham v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 34 Cal.4th 553, 575 (2004).)