|
P1351 REVIEW DENIED Although a suit to lift an injunction obtained by a state agency on the ground that its activities were void because its members were appointed in a manner that violated the state Constitution was successful in the trial court, plaintiff was not a successful litigant because the trial court's decision was reversed on appeal on the ground that the method by which the members were selected did not affect validity of the injunction; although the Legislature subsequently amended statutes requiring agency members be chosen in a different way, the suit was not a catalyst for change in the agency's behavior, since the agency acted in response to the statutory amendment rather than to the lawsuit, and since the suit did not seek to change the way members were selected but to lift the injunction; for these reasons plaintiff was not entitled to fees as a private attorney general under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5.CitationMARINE v CA COASTAL COMM (Private AG) 160 CA4 867 [See: CCP 1021.5; Marine Forests v CA Coastal Com, 36 C4 1; Graham v DaimlerChrysler 34 C4 553, P/AT 1/05]
|
|
