1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
George Kennedy & Ann Ravel’s Opposition to
Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Fees & Costs
-1-
C05-4188
A N N M ILLER R A V EL
C ounty C ounsel
C ounty of Santa C lara
S an Jose, C alifornia
ANN MILLER RAVEL, County Counsel (S.B. #62139)
DAVID M. ROLLO, Deputy County Counsel (S.B. #111998)
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
70 West Hedding, East Wing, 9 Floor
th
San Jose, California 95110-1770
Telephone: (408) 299-5900
Facsimile: (408) 292-7240
Attorneys for Defendants
GEORGE KENNEDY and
ANN MILLER RAVEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
VIDEO SOFTWARE DEALERS
)
ASSOCIATION, et al.,
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., )
)
Defendants.
)
)
No. C05-4188
DEFENDANTS GEORGE KENNEDY AND
ANN MILLER RAVEL’S OPPOSITION TO
MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND
COSTS
Date: October 19, 2007
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Crtrm: 6
Defendants George Kennedy and Ann Miller Ravel, sued in their official capacity (the
“County Defendants”), hereby oppose Plaintiffs’ Notice of Motion and Motion for Attorneys’
Fees and Costs.
I.
ISSUE PRESENTED
The County Defendants did not enact the challenged legislation, take any steps to
enforce it, or choose the timing or venue in which to litigate regarding it. Under these
circumstances, an award of attorneys’ fees against the County Defendants would be
unwarranted, unfair and unjust.
/ /
/ /
Case 5:05-cv-04188-RMW Document 115 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 1 of 6
Video Software Dealers Association et al v. Schwarzenegger et al
Doc. 115
Dockets.Justia.com
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
George Kennedy & Ann Ravel’s Opposition to
Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Fees & Costs
-2-
C05-4188
A N N M ILLER R A V EL
C ounty C ounsel
C ounty of Santa C lara
S an Jose, C alifornia
II.
FACTS
In 2005, the Legislature of the State of California enacted legislation that imposed
restrictions on the sale