By Christopher S. Andre
California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) generally requires trial courts to award attorney's fees and costs to plaintiffs who prevail on claims for alleged violation of the FEHA. However, without specific reference to the FEHA, California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1033(a) gives trial courts discretion to deny attorney's fees and costs if the "prevailing" plaintiff recovers a judgment that could have been had in a limited civil case (i.e., $25,000 or less).
On January 14, 2010, the California Supreme Court unanimously held in Robert Chavez v. City of Los Angeles that Code of Civil Procedure Section 1033(a) applies to claims for alleged violation of the FEHA and that a trial court has discretion to deny attorney's fees and costs if: (a) the "prevailing" plaintiff recovers a judgment that could have been rendered in a limited civil case, and (b) the case could reasonably have been litigated as a limited civil case bearing in mind the $25,000 maximum recovery permitted in limited civil cases and the somewhat streamlined litigation procedures in limited civil cases.
In Chavez, Mr. Chavez, a police officer, brought numerous claims of alleged discrimination and retaliation against the City of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Police Department, and others. Mr. Chavez prevailed on just one of his claims for which the jury awarded him $11,500 but sought an award of attorney's fees and costs of approximately $870,000.00. The California Supreme Court held the trial court correctly applied Code of Civil Procedure Section 1033(a) when it denied Mr. Chavez' request for attorney's fees and costs.
To read the complete text of the California Supreme Court's decision, click here.
