By: Libi Uremovic | Original Article at patch.com
Last year the City of Beaumont refused to release the 2013 Internal Controls Report. Judy Bingham sued the City to force compliance. The City released the documents on October 8, 2014, but refused to pay Judy’s legal fees and attempted to obtain legal fees from Judy. The City’s actions created another five months of litigation.
On March 25, 2015, the Tentative Ruling was released which dismissed the City’s claim for legal fees and instructed Bingham’s Lawyer to file a motion for attorney fees and costs. The City had until 4:30 pm to request oral argument to contest the ruing, but did not reply.
Ruling: Sustained. No leave to amend. Petitioner has 30 days leave to file a motion for attorney fees and costs.
It is undisputed that the City produced a copy of the [Internal Controls] Report to the Petitioner on October 2, 2014 which is the subject of the petition for writ of mandamus. The petition is therefore moot, and the only issue remaining is whether Petitioner is entitled to costs and attorneys’ fees under Gov. Code 6259(d).
The Respondent’s request for attorney fees and costs is denied. The petition in this case was not ‘clearly frivolous’ so as to award attorneys’ fees and costs to the City.
LAWSUIT COMPARISON
City of Beaumont: Population = 40,000 Litigation Pending = 15
City of Riverside: Population = 315,000 Litigation Pending = 6
City of Fresno: Population = 510,000 Litigation Pending = 11
City of Huntington Beach Population = 200,000 Litigation Pending = 7
City of San Diego Population = 1,400,000 Litigation Pending = 4