A California appeals court says San Diego public schools must pay the legal bills for a group of parents who successfully sued over the school system's Covid vaccine mandate for students.
In the decision, the appeals court overturned the ruling of San Diego County Superior Court Judge Richard S. Whitney.
That judge had determined that, even though the parents had won in court, the school district still didn't need to pay their attorney fees, because the school district's move to force students to receive the Covid jab was rooted in a desire to protect students and so was "commendable."
The appellate decision was authored by Justice William Dato, with concurrence from justices Judith McConnell and Terry B. O'Rourke.
"The right to 'due process' is fundamental to our constitutional system, and the underlying case was ultimately about requiring that the District comply with established process and procedure," Justice Dato wrote. "No one would argue that uniform statewide standards adopted by the People’s duly elected representatives after legislative study and debate can be ignored merely because the end sought to be achieved is arguably a virtuous one.
"In a similar fashion, when citizens bring a successful legal action to ensure that those statewide standards are followed, a court cannot deny them statutory attorney’s fees to which they would otherwise be entitled merely because it might disagree with their ultimate aim.
"A law that is not fairly applied to all protects none," Dato wrote.
The case arose in 2021, when the parents associated with Let Them Choose filed suit San Diego Superior Court to challenge the San Diego Unified District's so-called "Vaccination Roadmap."
The Roadmap plan amounted to a mandate requiring that all students receive a Covid vaccine to be allowed to attend in-person classes and participate in extracurricular activities.
Let Them Choose's lawsuit challenged the Roadmap by claiming the local schools vaccine mandate was illegal, because it was not allowed under California state law.
Let Them Choose won first in the lower court and then on appeal in 2022, as courts agreed the district's forced Covid vaccine mandate amounted to violations of the parents' and students' rights to due process, because state law did not allow such a local school mandate for students.
Following their victory, the Let Them Choose parents filed motions in San Diego Superior Court, seeking court orders requiring the San Diego school district to pay their legal bills. They asserted that under California law, they were the prevailing party in the case and were owed reimbursement by the losing party - in this case, San Diego Unified School District.
The motion for fees landed before Judge Whitney, who was a different judge than the one who had invalidated the Roadmap.
Whitney sided with the school district, finding the district didn't owe fees because Let Them Choose's lawsuit "did not enforce an important right affecting the public" and "in adopting the vaccination requirement, (the district) sought to protect students and 'did nothing to adversely affect the public interest.'"
The parents then appealed that ruling.
And on appeal, the justices determined the Whitney's reasoning was off the mark.
"Although this case represents another chapter in the age-old debate about whether commendable ends justify questionable means, the trial court’s reasoning reflects an inappropriately narrow reading of both the concept of 'public interest' (as set forth in California law) and the beneficial effects of plaintiffs’ lawsuit," Dato wrote in the appellate opinion.
"It may well be that requiring vaccinations for students was a good public health policy and a prudent precaution. But this case was never about the merits of the District’s underlying decision. Rather, it was always about process. The problem with the Roadmap was that the State had established procedures for adding new school attendance vaccination requirements, and the District failed to follow the law."
The justices also rejected San Diego school district officials' attempts to claim the lawsuit didn't end the mandate. The district argued they voluntarily abandoned the Roadmap "for unrelated reasons."
That is irrelevant to the discussion, the justices said, as the district "never retreated from its assertion in the trial court or on appeal that it was entitled to implement the Roadmap."
"That it chose to delay and ultimately cancel its plans does not change the fact that the lawsuit enforced an important right affecting the public interest by making clear that both now and in the future, the District was required to follow the mandatory vaccination protocols established by state law," Dato wrote.
The appellate justices said the result of the lawsuit was a court order requiring the San Diego district - and, by extension, other school districts - to follow the law before seeking to impose such local vaccination mandates.
"The interest is an important one, but vindicating it generates no economic benefit for its champions," Dato said. "As a result, an award of attorney's fees ... is peculiarly appropriate."
Let Them Choose and other parents in the action have been represented by attorneys Lee Michael Andelin and Arie L. Spangler, of the firm of Aannestad Andelin & Corn, of Cardiff-by-the-Sea; Chris Czaplak, of the Precept Group, of La Mesa ; and Allison R. Lucas, of Siri & Glimstad, of Detroit, Michigan.
San Diego Unified School District is represented by attorneys Mark Robert Bresee, Amy Estrada and Alyssa Ruiz de Esparza, of the firm of Atkinson Andelson Loya Ruud & Romo, of La Jolla .