An attorneys’ fees award in public interest litigation may not be reduced because of a trial court’s belief that the government defendants could better spend the money on their own citizens, the Court of Appeal held yesterday in Rogel v. City of Lynwood.  “Allowing properly documented attorneys’ fees to be cut simply because a losing party is a governmental entity would defeat the purposes of the private attorney general doctrine”, the court concluded.

Nor may fees be reduced because the plaintiffs were represented free of charge either by public interest law firms or by private law firms, the court ruled. Permitting a “pro bono discount,” the court reasoned, “would lead to the anomalous result that the only cases in which fully compensatory fees can be awarded are those in which the prevailing plaintiffs actually have the ability to pay their attorneys.”

Western Center was enlisted to prosecute the appeal because of the importance of the issues involved.  Counsel litigating the case on the merits included:    Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher; O’Melveny & Myers; Public Counsel; Public Interest Law Project; and sole practitioner Rebecca Thornton (who has since joined Western Center as a staff attorney).