Winning Plaintiff on Trespass Claim Entitled to More Fees On Appeal.
Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.9 has existed since 1986 and allows a prevailing plaintiff to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for prevailing in an action to recover personal or real property damages from a trespass upon lands either under cultivation or intended/used for the raising of livestock.
In Airport Ranch Co. v. Beserra, Case No. B212963 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Mar. 16, 2011) (unpublished), plaintiffs won a trespass claim for maintenance of a rock groin and levee in the Santa Clara River by neighboring defendants. The jury verdict was $1.24 million, with the trial court granting an injunction requiring the removal of the rock groin and levee as well as adjacent arundo vegetation from the river. The trial court also awarded undisclosed attorney’s fees and costs to plaintiffs under section 1021.9. Defendants appealed, but lost their merit challenges. The appellate court then determined that plaintiffs were entitled to appellate fees also, remanding for a determination by the trial court. (Amtower v. Photon Dynamics, Inc., 158 Cal.App.4th 1582, 1610 (2008).)
NO TRESPASSING
BLOG UNDERVIEW--The Second District, Division 6 gets quite a few appeals involving trespass, nuisance, and negligence claims between neighboring farmers, because there are still many citrus and other farms in the Ventura County area. In fact, co-contributor Mike, with the able assistance of his former Jackson DeMarco colleague Greg Regier, won a trespass/nuisance trial and the subsequent appeal in Ventura County Superior Court for some plaintiffs, also garnering substantial fees under section 1021.9. (For details, see one of our early posts on July 16, 2008 on Hobson v. Leavens.) Interestingly enough, the same trial and appellate attorneys in his case were involved in the Airport Ranch litigation.
Comments