Golden Hill Neighborhood Assn. v. City of San Diego
The Golden Hill Neighborhood Association and property owner John McNab (collectively Association) prevailed in a prior appeal in which this court ordered the trial court to vacate the judgment and issue a new judgment granting the Association's requested relief against the City of San Diego (City). (Golden Hill Neighborhood Assn., Inc. v. City of San Diego (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 416 (Golden Hill).) After the remittitur was issued and the trial court entered the new judgment, the Association sought attorney fees under the private attorney general doctrine. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 1021.5 (§ 1021.5).) The trial court denied the motion, finding it was untimely under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1702(c)(1).[1]
We determine the trial court erred in ruling that the Association's attorney fees motion was governed by rule 3.1702(c)(1). Under settled law, rule 3.1702(b)(1) is the applicable rule and the Association's motion was timely under this rule. We reject the City's alternate contention that the Association waived its right to seek attorney fees by failing to seek the fees after the initial trial or during the prior appeal. We reverse and remand for the court to consider the Association's attorney fees motion on its merits.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
In 2007, the Association sued the City challenging the legality of a City resolution establishing a Golden Hill maintenance district (District) and challenging the City's initial 2007 assessments to fund services in the maintenance district. (Golden Hill, supra, 199 Cal.App.4th at pp. 426-428.) In its complaint and petition for writ of mandate, the Association claimed the City's formation of the District and the 2007 assessments violated article XIII D of the California Constitution (article XIIID), which limits a local government's ability to levy special assessments against real property. (Golden Hill, supra, at pp. 426-428.)
The next year the Association filed a second lawsuit against the City challenging the District's 2008 tax assessments. (Golden Hill, supra, 199 Cal.App.4th at p. 428.) The lawsuits were consolidated. (Id. at p. 421.)
Comments on Golden Hill Neighborhood Assn. v. City of San Diego