COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Part- II
A group of public entities are prosecuting a representative public nuisance action against a group of companies that manufactured lead paint. This action seeks abatement as the sole remedy, and it has not yet proceeded to trial. The companies filed a motion seeking to bar the public entities from compensating their private counsel by means of contingent fees. The superior court, relying on People ex rel. Clancy v. Superior Court (1985) 39 Cal.3d 740 (Clancy), issued an order barring the public entities from compensating their private counsel by means of any contingent fee agreement. The public entities seek writ relief from the superior courts order. They assert that Clancy does not bar all contingent fee agreements in public nuisance abatement actions, and that their contingent fee agreements are valid. Court conclude that Clancy does not bar the public entities contingent fee agreements with their private counsel, and Court issue a writ of mandate directing the superior court to vacate its order and issue a new order denying the companies motion.
Comments on COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Part- II