Reviewing Court Interprets “Without Any Reasonable Cause” Language, Reversing Fee Denial To Wife As A Matter Of Law And Remanding For A Determination Of Amount Of Statutory Fees Awardable To Her.
The First District, Division 1 was obviously troubled by the egregious facts at issue in Humboldt County Adult Protective Services v. Superior Court, Case No. A145981 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 24, 2016) (published), where the county adult protective services obtained a temporary order revoking a written advance heath care directive based on an inadequate evidentiary showing, failure to cite the pertinent Health & Safety Code provisions, and the withholding of contrary medical evidence which supported the wife’s decision to honor her husband’s health care directives. Once wife retained an attorney, the county services withdrew its petition such that the temporary order was vacated. Nonetheless, the trial judge denied wife any attorney’s fees under a discretionary statutory provision, Health & Safety Code section 4771(a), which allows for an award of attorney’s fees to a person like wife “if the court determines the proceeding was commenced without any reasonable cause.”
The appellate court reversed as a matter of law, determining that the lower court’s discretion could only be exercised in one manner—granting an award of fees to wife.
In construing the “without any reasonable cause” language, the 1/1 DCA panel relied on the definition found in other legal contexts given that section 4771(a) had no clarifying definition. It found that fee entitlement was guided by an objective standard, namely, whether any reasonable attorney would have advanced the claim as tenable. Here, there was no evidentiary support for the county services’ position and jaded proof was presented before the lower court such that a remand was not in order as to fee entitlement, simply to determine what amount of reasonable fees should be awarded to wife.
Comments