Willard v. Kelley, No. G050340 (D4d3 Jul. 21, 2015)
A candidate for OC Auditor-Controller challenged his opponent’s ballot designation as misstating his occupation. The challenge failed. The defending candidate sought his attorneys’ fees under Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5, which permits fee awards in cases that substantially further the public interest. While prior cases have held that there can be a significant public benefit when candidates for office are permitted to disseminate their views on issues pertinent to an election, a ticky-tack fight over whether one candidate properly described his occupation doesn’t rise to that level. So the trial court properly declined to award fees under § 1021.5.
No comments:
Post a Comment