Great Oaks Water v. Santa Clara Valley Water Dist. CA6

Filed 3/26/15 Great Oaks Water v. Santa Clara Valley Water Dist. CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

GREAT OAKS WATER COMPANY, H035885 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Appellant, Super. Ct. No. CV053142)

v.

SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT,

Defendant and Respondent.

Plaintiff Great Oaks Water Company (Great Oaks) brought this appeal from the trial court’s denial of its request for attorney fees in an action where it secured a judgment against defendant Santa Clara Valley Water District (District ) based upon the latter’s allegedly unlawful fixing of a groundwater extraction charge, and allegedly improper application of the proceeds of the charge. Great Oaks contends that it should have been awarded its fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, which authorizes such an award “to a successful party . . . in any action which has resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest,” provided certain conditions are satisfied. Great Oaks contends that the trial court erred by concluding that the conditions were not satisfied. This appeal, however, is a companion to the appeal in Great Oaks Water Company v. Santa Clara Valley Water District, No. H035260, in which the District has challenged

the judgment underlying the application for fees at issue here. By separate opinion in that matter this court has now reversed the underlying judgment in its entirety. It follows that Great Oaks is no longer “a successful party” for purposes of the statute it relies on here, and that its claims of error in this matter are therefore moot. The order denying the application for attorney fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5 is affirmed.

2

______________________________________ RUSHING, P.J.