Court Abuses Discretion by Denying Attorney Fee Award Based on Evidence Problems to which Opposing Party Did Not Object

In Gonzalez v. Santa Clara County Department of Social Services, published February 28, 2017, the Sixth District Court of Appeal reversed in part an order on the Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5 attorney fee motion of a successful plaintiff. The plaintiff had multiple successive counsel. The trial court denied fees for all but the most recent. The appellate court concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to fees for the services of her appellate attorney, since the appellate court had been able to observe the attorney's work first-hand and concluded the plaintiff was entitled to at least some fees for the attorney's success in obtaining a favorable published opinion. The trial court had denied the other attorneys' fees based on evidentiary shortcomings in their showing to which the respondent had not objected. Absent a valid objection or prejudice from the evidence, the trial court should have credited the evidence and awarded at least some fees, particularly fees that the respondent had admitted were reasonable. The appellate court remanded the case so that the trial court could determine a reasonable fee award.