Blythe

Blythe v. County of Riverside CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 16, 2014E055186California9,322 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Defendant County of Riverside (the County) appeals judgment awarding plaintiffs Stephanie Blythe and Michelle Swanson1 (plaintiffs) attorney fees in their employment

discrimination action brought under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act

(FEHA; Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.)2 against the County. The County contends the trial

court should have denied plaintiffs’ motion for attorney fees because it was untimely and

plaintiffs failed to establish good cause for the over two-year delay in filing the motion.

The County also argues the trial court miscalculated the amount of attorney fees awarded

and the fees were excessive. In addition, the County argues that plaintiffs had no

standing to seek attorney fees on behalf of their previous attorney, Andrew Roth

(Andrew). The County further asserts that the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees

for Andrew’s legal services because he abandoned his clients and awarding fees to

plaintiffs would constitute an unjustified windfall. The County also contends plaintiffs’

contingency fee agreement violates California State Bar rules and public policy against

fee splitting, and encourages counsel to grossly pad…

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.