Napa County Code Section Allowed For Prevailing Party Fees And Government Code Section 25845(b) Allowed For County’s Recoupment Of Expert Fees.
In County of Napa v. Silver, Case No. A146586 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Sept. 20, 2019) (unpublished), Napa County won a public nuisance abatement action against appellants involving the European grapevine moth and dead/dying vine on appellants’ vineyard. The trial judge also awarded County prevailing party fees under Napa Code section 1.20.025 and expert fees of $1,575 under Government Code section 25845(b).
The appellate court affirmed these awards, as well as the merit judgment.
Although the Napa Code section had no definition of “prevailing party,” courts analyze which party prevailed on a practical level. (Salehi v. Surfside III Condominium Owners Assn., 200 Cal.App.4th 1146, 1153 (2011); Intelligent Investments Corp. v. Gonzalez, 1 Cal.App.5th Supp. 1, 6-7 (2016).) Under this test, County prevailed—after an evidentiary hearing, the lower court decreed parts of appellants’ vineyard to be a nuisance, ordered abatement, and declared County to be the prevailing party after the hearing; County obtained the majority of the relief it sought.
With respect to expert fees, Government Code section 25845(b) provides that, in nuisance abatement proceedings, the owner of the property shall be liable “for all costs of abatement incurred by the county, including, but not limited to, administrative costs, and any and all costs incurred in the physical abatement of the nuisance. Recovery of costs pursuant to this section shall be in addition to and shall not limit any prevailing party’s rights to recover costs pursuant to Sections 1032 and 1033.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure or any other provision of law.” Even if expert fees were not awardable under the routine costs statutes, they were under the Government Code section such that the costs award was affirmed too.
Comments