This Tentative Ruling is made by Judge Julia Spain Plaintiff DIRECT ACTION EVERYWHERE SF BAY AREA's Motion for Attorney's Fees is DENIED.
Plaintiff DxE seeks an award of attorney's fees in the amount of $1,541,006.00 pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 1021.5, contending that its lawsuit was the catalyst through which it obtained its primary litigation objection "for Diestel to cease its false advertising" (P Motion, p.2) and therefore it is entitled to attorney's fees for securing a public benefit. This contention is supported by neither the facts nor the law.
California voters approved Proposition 64 on November 2, 2004. In doing so, the California Supreme Court held "the voters found and declared that the UCL's broad grant of standing had encouraged '[f]rivolous unfair competition lawsuits [that] clog our courts[,] cost taxpayers' and 'threaten[ ] the survival of small businesses....' (Prop. 64, § 1, subd. (c) ['Findings and Declarations of Purpose'].) The former law, the voters d
Hearing Date
February 16, 2021
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
This Tentative Ruling is made by Judge Julia Spain Plaintiff DIRECT ACTION EVERYWHERE SF BAY AREA's Motion for Attorney's Fees is DENIED.
Plaintiff DxE seeks an award of attorney's fees in the amount of $1,541,006.00 pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 1021.5, contending that its lawsuit was the catalyst through which it obtained its primary litigation objection "for Diestel to cease its false advertising" (P Motion, p.2) and therefore it is entitled to attorney's fees for securing a public benefit. This contention is supported by neither the facts nor the law.
California voters approved Proposition 64 on November 2, 2004. In doing so, the California Supreme Court held "the voters found and declared that the UCL's broad grant of standing had encouraged '[f]rivolous unfair competition lawsuits [that] clog our courts[,] cost taxpayers' and 'threaten[ ] the survival of small businesses....' (Prop. 64, § 1, subd. (c) ['Findings and Declarations of Purpose'].) The former law, the voters d