by Garth Meyer
A group including Redondo Beach Mayor Bill Brand and City Councilman Nils Nehrenheim picked up a legal win Jan. 22 when an L.A. Superior Court judge ruled they do not have to pay $164,000 in attorneys’ fees to plaintiffs who brought a losing case against them, about the fight against the defunct CenterCal waterfront project.
The plaintiffs still may appeal.
“We’re very pleased,” said attorney Jeanne Zimmer, who represented Nehrenheim. “It was an unreasonable motion to bring. We’re happy. And we’re done. Though I’ve said that before.”
CenterCal co-founders Fred Bruning and Jean Paul Wardy were not named in the original case, but were in the judgment, after it was established that they were funding the lawsuit by residents Chris Voisey and Arnette Travis.
“Nonparty Developers argue at cross-purposes,” wrote Judge Kerry Bensinger in his Jan. 22 ruling on the attorneys’ fees. “On the one hand, they argue the judgment against them is void because they were not parties to the action. On the other hand, they argue they are entitled to attorney’s fees because they are prevailing parties.”
“Prevailing parties” refers to, after Brand and Nehrenheim’s group won the case in 2018 they sought $896,000 in attorney fees themselves.
That matter went to the California Supreme Court, with a final answer of “no.”
The Supreme Court itself did not rule, but sent the question back to the appellate court to determine whether or not Voisey and Travis’ original case was frivolous. The appeals court said it was not frivolous, and in turn, the defendants – Brand’s group – would not get attorneys’ fees.
That was last May. In August, the plaintiffs filed for their own legal fees.
They have now gotten a “no” as well.
Without an appeal, the six-year case is over.
Previously, the appellate court laid out four elements to grant attorney fees after deciding a case. “(1) the party enforces an important right affecting the public interest; (2) the party confers a significant benefit to the general public or a large class of people, (3) an award is warranted because private enforcement was necessary and financially burdensome, and (4) fees must not be paid out of a recovery.”
Plaintiffs’ attorney Betty Shumener argued that Bruning, Wardy, Voisey and Travis should get the attorneys’ fees based on elements one and two.
Judge Bensinger referred to the court of appeal’s previous opinion on this.
“The public at large did not know and did not care about the issues the court adjudicated. Nothing in the record demonstrates even minimal public interest in these obscurities,” appellate justice John Wiley wrote. “Practically and realistically, important rights affecting the public were nowhere to be seen.”
Judgments
Brand and Nehrenheim’s party had the opportunity to appeal the Supreme Court ruling on the $896,000 (plus interest) in legal fees they sought. They did not.
“In order to do that, it really has to be an issue of statewide concern,” said Steve Colin, attorney for Brand, and his 2017/2021 campaign treasurer Linda Moffatt. “This was just an issue of attorney’s fees.”
Bobby Nayebdadash represented Wayne Craig, co-founder of political action committee (PAC) Rescue Our Waterfront, which was also party to the original case.
The suit maintained that Brand and Nehrenheim coordinated with Craig in a hidden manner for the PAC, and failed to submit the proper forms for disclosure.
Rescue Our Waterfront (ROW), co-founded by Nehrenheim before he was on city council, was set up to stop the $400 million CenterCal King Harbor development plan, and support alternate smaller waterfront projects.
Funds
Attorney Shumener said that she brought the motion for $164,000 in attorney fees for Voisey, Travis, Bruning and Wardy in good faith.
“We had been wrongfully named to the lawsuit at the judgment stage,” she said.
The trial court judge had also deemed Voisey and Travis “shills” for Bruning and Wardy.
“That doesn’t make you a shill. It makes you a person willing to fund someone pursuing a cause,” Shumener said. “There’s nothing wrong with funding a lawsuit for a good cause.”
“Because they treated us as defendants, I thought we were entitled to recover our legal fees. They definitely had named (Bruning and Wardy) as plaintiffs. How do you name people to a judgment when you’re not part of the lawsuit? That was pretty outrageous on their part.”
She questioned the other side’s manner of payment for attorneys.
“Every time they make a move, they have a fundraiser,” Shumener said. “If other people pay for their lawsuits, that’s okay. A third party paying for a plaintiff’s legal fees is no different than a third party paying legal fees from a fundraising event.”
Shumener gave no word on whether they will appeal Judge Bensinger’s ruling.
Following last week’s verdict, ROW’s Craig sent out a notice to supporters:
“We are getting closer to our goal but ROW still needs your help to defend Redondo Beach residents from unscrupulous developers and crony corruption, and to help build the future you voted for at the ballot box,” he wrote. “So please donate, please visit [their website] to see how you can help.”
Craig confirmed that some of the money raised goes to attorney’s fees.
“All these steps take money, this isn’t done in a vacuum,” he said. ER
