Page 3
Court of Appeal:
Church Is Not Due Fees for Successful Contempt Challenge
Opinion Says Institution Is Not Entitled to Litigation Costs as Private Attorney General in Action Litigating Refusal to Comply With COVID-19 Health Orders
By a MetNews Staff Writer
A church is not entitled to litigation costs under the private attorney general statute, Code of Civil Procedure §1021.5, based on its success in obtaining annulment of contempt orders relating to its non-compliance with pandemic-related health orders, the Sixth District Court of Appeal has declared.
The institution vindicated its own interests rather than benefitting the public, Justice Patricia Bamattre-Manoukian said in an unpublished opinion filed Thursday and posted yesterday.
Appealing the denial of attorney fees was Calvary Chapel San Jose and its pastor, Mike McClure.
Sec. 1021.5 provides for the recovery of attorney fees by a prevailing party where “(a) a significant benefit, whether pecuniary or nonpecuniary, has been conferred on the general public or a large class of persons” and “(b) the necessity and financial burden of private enforcement, or of enforcement by one public entity against another public entity, are such as to make the award appropriate….”
Earlier Litigation
Calvary had earlier prevailed in appealing contempt orders, and related monetary sanctions, issued by Santa Clara Superior Court Judge Peter Kirwan after failing to comply with the court’s restraining orders enjoining it from holding services that were out of compliance with county and state public health orders.
The restraining orders and contempt proceedings were sought by the State of California, the County of Santa Clara, and the county’s Public Health Director Sara H. Cody.
In a published opinion filed on Aug. 15, 2022, written by Presiding Justice Mary J. Greenwood, the Sixth District found that a temporary restraining order enjoining the church from holding indoor services beyond certain capacity restrictions violated the First Amendment.
Declining to decide whether mandates relating to face coverings and social distancing survive constitutional scrutiny when applied to religious institutions, the court found that the contempt orders were improper as they failed to impose discrete fines for each violation and impermissibly ordered a single, aggregate payment of $33,000.
Request for Fees
The church parties argued that the institution’s disobedience of the temporary restraining orders served the important public interest of upholding constitutionally protected religious freedom and that their success on appeal conferred a significant benefit on churches and people of faith, qualifying them for the recovery of attorney fees under §1021.5.
On May 19, 2023, Santa Clara Superior Court Judge Evette Pennypacker denied the request for fees, concluding that opposing the contempt action was unnecessary as the church could have asserted its First Amendment rights while abiding by the health orders.
Pennypacker also noted that it was unlikely that an award of fees under §1021.5 could be met in the context of a contempt proceeding as the accused would always have an independent incentive to defend against sanctions.
Bamattre-Manoukian acknowledged in her opinion that there was “a doubt as to whether the…order denying Calvary’s motion for private attorney general fees is appealable…because [it] was made in the context of contempt proceedings” but said “[w]e will exercise our discretion to treat Calvary’s appeal as a petition for a writ of mandate.”
Justices Allison M. Danner and Charles E. Wilson joined in the opinion.
Purpose of Legislation
Bamattre-Manoukian noted that “the purpose of section 1021.5 is ‘to financially reward attorneys who successfully prosecute cases in the public interest’ ” and to ensure that worthy claimants are not precluded from pursuing claims based on a lack of resources.
Looking to the statutory text, the jurist pointed out that subdivision (b) has two elements—whether private enforcement is necessary and if the financial burden of private enforcement warrants subsidizing the successful party’s attorneys. She cited case law providing that an award is only appropriate where victory transcends the claimant’s personal interests.
Applying that standard to the present case, she opined:
“This court’s annulment of the contempt orders and reversal of thousands of dollars in monetary sanctions… ‘ha[d] as its primary effect the vindication’ of Calvary Chapel’s personal rights to avoid contempt findings and significant monetary sanctions….Consequently, Calvary Chapel’s self-interest was sufficient incentive to assert constitutional defenses in the contempt proceedings, and the financial incentive of an award of private attorney general fees was not necessary.”
The justice pointed out that “Calvary…asserts that it was not motivated by pecuniary interests,” pointing to its status as a non-profit organization. Unpersuaded by this contention, she wrote in a footnote “the financial status of Calvary Chapel is irrelevant to our analysis of the section 1021.5, subdivision (b) criterion of financial burden.”
She concluded that “[w]e determine that under the circumstances of this case, Calvary has not shown that the financial incentives provided by section 1021.5 were necessary to assert its constitutional defense to the contempt proceedings.”
The case is Calvary Chapel San Jose v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County, H051276.
The decision follows the July 18 decision by the Fourth District’s Div. One in Let Them Choose v. San Diego Unified School District, in which the court found that a parent-rights group and an individual parent were entitled to attorney fees under §1021.5 relating to their successful challenge of COVID-19 vaccine mandates for students in the San Diego Unified School District.
There, Justice William Dato explained that “the lawsuit enforced an important right affecting the public interest by making clear that both now and in the future, the District was required to follow the mandatory vaccination protocols established by state law.”
Copyright 2024, Metropolitan News Company