Talk about an excellent post — The UCL Practitioner outdid itself today with its play-by-play of the oral argument yesterday in County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court (ARCO), No. H031540 (Cal. Ct. App.). UCL’s alter ego, the estimable Kimberly A. Kralowec, observed the hearing in the flesh and sums up thus:

As I mentioned early this morning, my sense at the conclusion of the argument was that the justices were leaning in favor of the County’s position. I think they will either adopt the County’s legal argument, or remand for the trial court to consider, at the end of the case, whether the government attorneys exercised sufficient control throughout the litigation so as to make an award of contingency fees proper.  Either result would be a victory for the County.  An opinion will be due by mid-April.

Feedicon14x14 Contingent business law.