Vo

Jonathan Vo v. Las Virgenes Municipal Water District

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 226·2000 Daily Journal DAR 3275·79 Cal. App. 4th 440·94 Cal. Rptr. 2d 143·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2430
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 2000B130613California3,149 words

Opinion

Opinion

Turner, J.

Introduction

Defendant, Las Vírgenes Municipal Water District, appeals from an order awarding, plaintiff, Jonathan Vo, $470,000 in attorney fees after he prevailed on his complaint for violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.). We agree with plaintiff that defendant has failed to provide an adequate record to permit us to determine if the trial court abused its discretion in fixing the attorney fee award in the sum of $470,000. We affirm, and plaintiff may seek additional fees pursuant to rule 870.2 of the California Rules of Court.

Background

The parties elected to proceed under California Rules of Court, rule 5.1 and have filed a joint appendix. The joint appendix does not contain a copy of the complaint or answer. The record also does not include a copy of the reporter’s transcript from a three-week jury trial. Both parties have referred to the complaint and matters raised during the trial which have has not been made a part of this record on appeal. From the sparse record that has been provided, the following procedural and factual matters are set forth.

Plaintiff’s employment by defendant led to a jury verdict in his…

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.