In an eagerly anticipated ruling, the California Supreme Court has held that in most instances organizations' decisions to offer their views as amici curiae shouldn't subject them to private attorney general fees. Justice Carlos Moreno noted that the organizations involved in the case had played a more "active role" than most amici, but concluded that the "policy of encouraging amicus curiae participation is not compatible with a rule that would place such a litigant at risk for attorney fees."
March 06, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Groups wishing to participate in cases as “friends of the court” need not worry too much about being hit with attorney fees.
In a ruling eagerly awaited statewide, the California Supreme Court on Thursday held that in most instances organizations’ decisions to offer their views as amici curiae shouldn’t subject them to private attorney general fees.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
Join the Mendocino County District Attorney s Office and work in Mendocino County home to redwoods, vineyards and picturesque coastline. ...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
