California Court of Appeal

Judgment declaring Vehicle Code sections 14602.6 and 23109.2 unconstitutional on their face, and awarding six-figures in attorney fees, is reversed as the trial court erred in holding that: 1) the statutory phrase "mitigating circumstances" in section 14602.6(b) is unconstitutionally vague on its face; 2) section 14602.6 violates the nondelegation doctrine; 3) section 14602.6 violates the equal protection clause by treating rental car agencies differently than private individual; and 4) section 23109.2(a) violates the non-delegation doctrine. As the judgment is reversed, plaintiff is no longer the prevailing party and is not entitled to attorney fees.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/11/2007
• Published 01/11/2007

Judges

• HAERLE, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Louis R. Mauro, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Christopher E. Krueger, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Kathleen A. Lynch, Deputy Attorney General, for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Mark T. Clausen, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.