On July 6, 2015, the Fourth District Court of Appeal ordered publication of Coalition for a Sustainable Yucaipa v. City of Yucaipa (July 6, 2015, E057589) __Cal.App.4th__. The court upheld the trial court’s ruling denying attorney’s fees to the Coalition for a Sustainable Yucaipa (Coalition) after the City of Yucaipa (City) rescinded project approvals for
Litigation
Court Upholds Substantial Reduction in Attorney Fee Award Based on Limited Success of the Prevailing Party
In North County Watch v. County of San Louis Obispo, 2015 Cal. Unpub. LEXIS 4275, the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision to award only a small portion of the attorney fees sought by the petitioner on the basis of their limited success in the litigation. The dispute resulting in…
Court of Appeal Denies Attorney’s Fees Motion in CEQA Litigation after Contract Dispute Resulted in Revocation of Project Approvals
In Coalition for a Sustainable Yucaipa v. City of Yucaipa (2015) Cal.App.Unpub. LEXIS 4016, the Coalition for a Sustainable Yucaipa (Coalition) challenged the City of Yucaipa’s (Yucaipa’s) approval of the Oak Hills Marketplace (Project). The Project was to be built on land owned by the Palmer General Corporation (Palmer) and developed by the Target Corporation…
Fourth District Court of Appeal Publishes Case Reducing Attorney Fees Following Limited Success on CEQA Challenge
On April 13, 2015, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District granted a request by respondent County of San Bernardino (County) and real party Al-Nur Islamic Center to publish its recent decision in Save Our Uniquely Rural Community Environment v. County of San Bernardino, 2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 307 (Cal. App. 4th…
Court Substantially Reduces Attorney Fees Following Limited Success on CEQA Challenge to Islamic Center in San Bernardino County
In an unpublished opinion in Save Our Uniquely Rural Community Environment (SOURCE) v. County of San Bernardino, 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1976, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court decision and reduced petitioner’s attorney fees by 80 percent in a challenge under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to a…
Appellate Court Denies Attorney Fees in CEQA Litigation Over Washoe Meadows State Park Land Transfer
In an unpublished decision in Washoe Meadows Community v. California Department of Parks & Recreation, 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 9256, the First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order granting petitioner’s attorney fees and held Washoe Meadows Community (Washoe) did not achieve its primary relief sought through the litigation.
In November…
Appellate Court Upholds Attorney Fees Award in CEQA Litigation Challenging State Water Board Adoption of Instream Flow Policy
In an unpublished opinion in Living Rivers Council v. State Water Resources Control Board, 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7321, the California Court of Appeal for the First District affirmed an award of attorney fees to Petitioners Living Rivers Council as the prevailing party in a CEQA lawsuit challenging an instream flow policy adopted …
Appellate Court Does Not Review City’s Nonpecuniary Interests to Determine If City Qualifies for Attorney Fees, But Rather Bases Award of Fees on Number of Issues Won
In City of Maywood v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2012) __ Cal.App.4th __ (Case No. B233739), the City of Maywood (City) filed a petition for writ of mandate to overturn the Los Angeles Unified School District’s (LAUSD) certification of a final environmental impact report (FEIR) prepared for a high school. The Second District Court…
Court Awards Attorneys’ Fees to Co-Counsel Who was Also a Named Party in CEQA Litigation
In Healdsburg Citizens for Sustainable Solutions v. City of Healdsburg (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 988, certified for partial publication, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed an award of attorneys’ fees resulting from a successful CEQA challenge to a co-counsel attorney who was also a named party in the case.
Petitioners, Healdsburg Citizens for Sustainable Solutions…
Court Denies Attorney’s Fees Where Successful Petitioner Does Not Confer a Significant Benefit to Public and Discharges Writ of Mandate After Compliance
In an unpublished opinion, California Oak Foundation v. County of Tehama (2012) 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. Lexis 3970, the California Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a decision denying petitioner’s request for attorney’s fees on the basis that their successful challenge to a golf course community project, which Tehama County approved in 2006, did not…