The Civil Justice Association of California found itself in a dilemma last year: Who should it support in a major contingency fee case in the California Supreme Court?

Its government association members, like the League of California Cities, wanted to back Santa Clara County and other government entities that seek to hire private lawyers on contingency to handle costly and time-consuming public nuisance cases. But CJAC’s industry members wanted to side with Atlantic Richfield Co. and other chemical manufacturers who argue that hiring such attorneys violates Supreme Court case law requiring government lawyers to remain neutral.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]