First District, Division 5 So Holds in City of Pleasanton Referendum Dispute.
We have to say that defendant victors—even partial victors—are usually awarded some amount of fees for winning anti-SLAPP motions, which carry a mandatory fee-shifting bias for defendant winners. (If you don't believe this, see our category "SLAPP.") The next case is but another addition to the jurisprudence tending to prove this point. You usually get your fees as a defendant SLAPP victor, unless no practical benefit was gained from the granting of the motion.
In Lin v. City of Pleasanton, Case No. A121147 (1st Dist., Div. 5 July 16, 2009) (certified for publication), former city councilperson and member of an unincorporated association "Save Pleasanton's Hill" partially won a SLAPP motion on one claim brought against her in a dispute to prevent the certification of a referendum petition that the councilperson was spearheading with respect to a proposed residential development. Landowner (and, indirectly, the City) did beat back the referendum certification, but councilperson was successful in reversing the result on appeal. The trial court refused councilperson her fees, and not surprisingly she appealed.
Guess what? Better reconsider the fees issue, lower court, said the reviewing tribunal.
Citing the strong preference of the SLAPP statute to award attorney's fees to successful defendants, the Court of Appeal found that the reversal of the lower court result and the partial win below meant the whole situation needed reassessment as far as the fee award was concerned. After all, the reversal and partial win might well mean that councilperson's actions did have practical benefit in the overall fight.
BLOG UNDERVIEW—We notice that Benjamin G. Shatz, an appellate attorney at Manatt Phelps, was lead appellate attorney who won on behalf of his client. He is an excellent attorney, and we send you congratulations for a hard fought win.
Comments