Priceline. Com Inc. v. City of Anaheim
Opinion
Opinion
Ikola, J.
Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment denying their petition for a writ of mandate directed to defendants the City of Anaheim, Mayor Curt Pringle, and City Attorney Jack White (collectively, Anaheim). Plaintiffs sought to compel Anaheim to litigate tax assessment proceedings without the assistance of outside counsel retained pursuant to a contingency fee agreement. They contend outside counsel’s contingency fee arrangement violates a government lawyer’s duty of neutrality. (See People ex rel. Clancy v. Superior Court (1985) 39 Cal.3d 740, 746-750 [ 218 Cal.Rptr. 24 , 705 P.2d 347 ] (Clancy).)
Clancy grants that “there are cases in which a government may hire an attorney on a contingent fee to try a civil case.” (Clancy, supra, 39 Cal.3d at p. 748 .) But Clancy bars contingency fee lawyers from being the government’s representative in a vaguely defined “class of civil actions” (ibid.) that require “a balancing of interests” and “a delicate weighing of values” (id. at p. 749). The only California appellate case applying this restriction is Clancy itself, which barred a contingency fee lawyer from trying public nuisance actions as the city attorney. Clancy does not bar…