Contractual Basis Was There, And No Apportionment Required Under the Facts.
The long-standing battle between Mr. Fleming and Capistrano Unified School District (CUSD) has finally ended, we think, in Fleming v. Capistrano Unified School Dist., Case No. G048523 et al. (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 7, 2015) (unpublished). This concerned Mr. Fleming’s involvement with compiling alleged “enemy lists” while he was at CUSD, resulting in criminal charges which ultimately got dismissed.
However, despite the criminal resolution, Mr. Fleming sought to recoup his criminal defense expenses and 18 months of severance from CUSD. He did not get it, with a trial judge granting summary judgment against him and awarding $123,233 in fees and $6,660.10 in costs in favor of CUSD.
The appeal on the SJM merits and fee award were affirmed in a 3-0 unpublished decision authored by Justice Fybel.
On the fees award, the appellate court agreed that Mr. Fleming sued under Amendment No. 11 with a fees clause. Although Mr. Fleming claimed he sought compensation based on a resignation agreement, the reviewing court found the issues involving Amendment No. 11 and the resignation agreement were intertwined, so no apportionment was required. Fee award affirmed.