Casas v. City of Baldwin Park CA2/5
This appeal is an outgrowth of the same proceedings that
resulted in our recent decision in Casas v. City of Baldwin Park,
et al. (Mar. 28, 2017, B270313) [nonpub. opn.] (Casas I).1
As
noted in that opinion, the trial court awarded Paul Cook, counsel
for plaintiff Julian Casas, nearly $40,000 in attorney fees for
work that led to the issuance of a writ of mandate compelling the
City of Baldwin Park (the City) to produce records pursuant to
the California Public Records Act (CPRA). We now consider
Casas’s claim that the trial court erred in refusing to award
additional attorney fees for work Cook performed in filing
motions and an ex parte application to compel compliance with
the writ the court issued.
Comments on Casas v. City of Baldwin Park CA2/5