Patterson

Patterson v. Superior Court

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 18, 2021B312411California7,405 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 10/18/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

MICHAEL PATTERSON, B312411

Petitioner, (Super. Ct. No. 20STCV14987) v.

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

LOS ANGELES COUNTY,

Respondent;

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS,

INC. et al.,

Real Parties in Interest.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS in mandate. Malcolm Mackey, Judge. Petition granted. Kyle Todd, P.C., Kyle Todd, Samantha Johnson and Alfredo Nava. No appearance for Respondent. Hill, Farrer & Burrill, James Bowles and Casey Morris for Real Parties in Interest Charter Communications, Inc. and Nicholas Lopez. ______________________

Several well-established rules govern imposition of fees and costs incurred in actions under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.). First, a successful plaintiff is entitled to recover his or her reasonable attorney fees. A prevailing defendant, however, may not be awarded attorney fees or costs “unless the court finds the action was frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless when brought, or the plaintiff continued to litigate after it clearly became so.”…

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.