|
p0326 An appeal that led to interpretation of a section of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act regarding removal of certain documents from an officer's personnel file was of sufficient public concern to justify the award of attorney fees under the private attorney general statute, and since the appellant incurred attorney fees with no guarantee his appeal would lead to the document's removal from his file and with no economic benefit to him even if it did, the statute's financial burden requirement was satisfied by the appeal.CitationOTTO v LA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (Private Attorney General) 106 CA4 328 [See: CCP 1021.5; Woodland Hills v City Council 23 C3 917; Otto v LA USD 89 CA4 985; County v County 78 CA3 82; Baggett v Gates 32 C3 128]
|
|
