Lyons

Lyons v. Chinese Hospital Ass'n

Good Law
136 Cal. App. 4th 1331·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 236·2006 Daily Journal DAR 2209·39 Cal. Rptr. 3d 550·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1586
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 2006A107461California9,529 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kline, J.

Introduction

Plaintiff Daniel Lyons (Lyons) appeals from a postjudgment order of the San Francisco Superior Court denying his motion for attorney fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5 following entry of a stipulated judgment and permanent injunction in Lyons’s lawsuit against defendant Chinese Hospital Association (CHA). By this judgment, CHA was “permanently enjoined” from violating specific asbestos laws concerning notification, training and surveying at CHA-owned buildings, including the Chinese Hospital, a medical office building and six other specified buildings. The injunction also required CHA to retain and pay North Tower Environmental, a certified asbestos consulting firm, to monitor CHA’s compliance with the asbestos laws, reporting annually to the court regarding CHA’s compliance for a period of three years.

The trial court denied the fee request on the grounds that Lyons was not a successful party under the statute; that Lyons failed to demonstrate that a fee award was appropriate because of the necessity and financial burden of private enforcement; that the district attorney instituted a parallel prosecution of defendant, also obtaining 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.