Costs Award Reversed Because Intertwined Claims Were Not Frivolous In Nature.
If a trial judge finds that a plaintiff’s FEHA case is not frivolous in nature, a defendant faces large odds to gain an award of attorney’s fees and costs. Hays v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. B291542 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 26, 2020) (unpublished) illustrates well this commentary.
Plaintiff suffered an adverse summary judgment motion in a mixed Labor Code § 1102.5 retaliation and FEHA suit against former employer County of Los Angeles. The trial judge denied County’s bid for $303,857.94 in attorney’s fees/costs under FEHA, after finding the case was not frivolous in nature. However, the lower court did award $15,644.44 out of $20,740.44 in routine costs.
The fee denial was affirmed based on the trial court’s conclusion that the case was not frivolous in nature. However, the costs award had to be reversed based on County’s concession that the Labor Code/FEHA claims were “indistinguishable” such that the non-frivolity finding translated into a conclusion that routine costs were not awardable under Williams v. Chino Valley Independent Fire Dist., 61 Cal.4th 97, 114-115 (2015).
Comments