City of Carson v. City of La Mirada
In the underlying lawsuit, the City of Carson (Carson) sought to force the defendants, City of La Mirada, City Council of the City of La Mirada, and the La Mirada Redevelopment Agency (together La Mirada), to comply with the requirements of Health and Safety Code section 33426.7 and Government Code section 53084, commonly known as Assembly Bill No. 178 (Assem. Bill No. 178 (1999-2000 Reg. Sess.) 3 & 2, respectively (A.B. No. 178), Stats. 1999, ch. 462). A.B. No. 178 was designed to prevent competition between municipalities for big box retailers, by requiring the city to which the retailer moves to share tax revenues with the city that it leaves. We reversed the trial courts ruling that denied Carsons petition for writ of mandate. In a published opinion (City of Carson v. City of La Mirada (2004) 125 Cal.App.4th 532 (Carson v. La Mirada) we held that Corporate Express, which had been lured away from Carson by La Mirada, was a big box retailer as defined by A.B. No. 178 with the result that La Mirada had to comply with the revenue sharing provisions of A.B. No. 178.
Carson now appeals from the subsequent order of the trial court that denied its attorney fees under the private attorney general fee doctrine (Code Civ. Proc., 1021.5). Court affirm.
Comments on City of Carson v. City of La Mirada