Bhakta

People v. Bhakta

Good Law
162 Cal. App. 4th 973·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 677·76 Cal. Rptr. 3d 421
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 6, 2008B190437California3,056 words

Opinion

Opinion

Flier, J.

Appellants Rameshbhai C. Bhakta, Manharbhai G. Bhakta and Sarojben D. Bhakta, individually and doing business as Boulevard Motel, appeal from a judgment and amended judgment in favor of respondent the People of the State of California and an award to respondent of $100,000 in attorney fees and costs. The judgments permanently enjoin appellants from facilitating or encouraging prostitution, or providing a place where prostitution can occur on the premises, pursuant to the “Red Light Abatement Law” (Pen. Code, § 11225 et seq.) and unfair competition law (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.). We hold (1) the trial court did not err in proceeding with a bench trial since appellants were not entitled to a jury trial and (2) the court properly exercised its discretion in awarding attorney fees and costs. We affirm the judgment and order awarding attorney fees and costs but vacate the amended judgment.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

This is the second appeal in this case. The background facts are set forth in our prior opinion. (People v. Bhakta (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 631 [37 Cal.Rptr.3d 652].) To briefly summarize, appellants are owners and operators of a motel located on South…

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.