In a land-shaking ruling from the Fourth District Court of Appeal, the court seemingly evolved the current environmental law narrative. According to a recent case, City of San Clemente v. Department of Transportation (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 1131, entities known as ‘Environmental Real Parties’ may have the right to attorney’s fees in specific situations where they assist agencies in defending against private party attacks on highway route extensions.
Unpacking the case, a homeowner’s association (Association), challenged a proposed state highway extension alignment and a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) settlement. The CEQA demand required the highway to bypass sensitive areas, but the Association was unwilling to shoulder the attorney’s fees under the codified “private attorney general” doctrine in Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5 (Section 1021.5).
Unexpectedly, the court decided otherwise. The Association, in this context, denied the attorney’s fee, signaling a possible shift towards endorsing broader financial support for Environmental Real Parties undertaking similar legal endeavours.
This adjustment, subtle as it may be, could have significant consequences for future environmental legal matters. Other Environmental Real Parties may now possess a stronger financial impetus to support agencies in their defense against private party attacks, particularly concerning public goods such as highway route extensions.
This ruling should alert legal professionals within this field. Going forward, it may become increasingly essential to account for the possibility – and potential financial impact – of ‘Environmental Real Parties’ becoming entitled to attorney’s fees for their role in such disputes.
Attentiveness to such developments will be critical in maintaining a complete and up-to-date understanding of environmental law, and its financial implications, in the coming years.