La Mirada Ave. Neighborhood Ass'n of Hollywood v. City of L. A.

Good Law
22 Cal. App. 5th 1149·232 Cal. Rptr. 3d 338
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 3, 2018B282137California4,069 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Hoffstadt, J.

*1152 Under *342 Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, 1 a trial court may award attorney's fees to the "successful party" in a lawsuit that "has resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest" if, among other things, the lawsuit confers "a significant benefit" upon "the general public or a large class of persons." If a party is "successful" and has conferred a "significant benefit" by prevailing at trial and obtaining a judgment that a construction project violates the zoning laws in existence at the time, is that party precluded from obtaining attorney's fees under section 1021.5 because the losing party gets the zoning laws changed and the project's validity under the changed law has yet to be finally determined? We conclude that the answer is "no." Consequently, and because we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in fixing the amount of attorney's fees, we affirm the awards of attorney's fees. *1153 FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

I. Facts

Real party in interest Target Corporation (Target) wants to build a retail store on the corner of Western Avenue and Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood, California.

For purposes of…

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.