Amarawansa

Amarawansa v. Superior Court

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 947·49 Cal. App. 4th 1251·57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 249·96 Daily Journal DAR 12141·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7411
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 3, 1996B104037California3,576 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klein, J.

Petitioners Karen B. Amarawansa, Barbara Bayliss, Steven P. Beltran, Hans F. Berg, Murray S. Bems, Claire Boudov, John Cahill, Maureen Donnelly Carlson, Frank Charles Ciafone, Jr., Frederick L. Darvey, R. Keith Davis, Robert A. Devine, Karen Fite, Linda Rose Fessler, Roberto Flores, Anthony R. Garcia, Barry Allen Herzog, Alex Iglesias, Alaleh Kamran, Joseph D. MacKenzie, James E. McNamara, John P. Newman, Kelly O’Brien, Michael A. Salazar, Darold M. Shirwo, Ronald W. Stenlake, and Paula S. Teske (collectively, petitioners) are panel attorneys originally appointed by respondent Superior Court of Los Angeles County (superior court) to represent parties in juvenile dependency cases at the rate of $45 per hour. The superior court adopted a flat fee compensation system for new cases, and subsequently extended the flat fee system to existing cases which petitioners had undertaken to handle at the hourly rate. Petitioners brought this writ to compel the superior court to continue paying them compensation at the rate of $45 per hour for the duration of the existing cases rather than pursuant to the new flat fee system.

The essential issue presented is whether petitioners have a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.