Deukmejian

In this case, the appellants challenge the trial court’s award of attorneys’ fees to the respondents’ counsel for legal services pro vided the respondents. Three central issues are raised on appeal. First, do the budget act restrictions on the state’s award of attorneys’ fees apply to awards granted pursuant to 42 United States Code section 1988 . Second, were the respondents “prevailing parties” within the meaning of 42 United States Code section 1988 . Finally, were the respondents entitled to attorneys’ fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5. We find that the first two issues are dispositive that the respondents were properly awarded attorneys’ fees in the case at bar, and that it is unnecessary to reach the third issue.

I. Statement of Facts and Proceedings Below

This case arose in the midst of a budget impasse that occurred in June and July of 1983. Because of this impasse, the State of California entered the 1983 fiscal year without having enacted a state budget. In the absence of a budget, there was no formal appropriation in effect for aid for families with dependent children (AFDC) payments. The Department of Social Services informed all county…