John R. Lawson Rock vs. California Air/CEQA

Complaint Information

E-FILED | 7/29/2016 1 || WANGER JONES HELSLEY PC FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

265 East River Park Circle, Suite 310 By: C. Balleza, DepUty 2 || Fresno, California 93720 Telephone: (559) 233-4800 3 || Facsimile: (559) 233-9330 4 || Timothy Jones #119841 John P. Kinsey #215916 3 Dylan J. Crosby #299536 6 7 || Attorneys for: Petitioners and Plaintiffs John R. Lawson Rock & Oil, Inc., and California 3 ‘ Trucking Association 9 \ SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF FRESNO

10 | CENTRAL DIVISION

I1 || JOHN R. LAWSON ROCK & OIL, INC; Case No. 14 CE CG 01494 MWS

CALIFORNIA TRUCKING

12 || ASSOCIATION, DECLARATION OF JOHN P. KINSEY

IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR

13 Petitioners and Plaintiffs, ATTORNEYS’ FEES AFTER , JUDGMENT GRANTING PETITION 14 V. FOR WRIT OF MANDATE AND

| ADJUDICATING COMPLAINT FOR 15 || CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE

BOARD and RICHARD COREY, in his RELIEF 16 j official capacity as Executive Officer of 17 the California Air Resources Board, (CCP § 1021.5) J Respondents and Defendants. Date: August 23,2016 18 Time: 3:30 p.m. | Dept.: 501 19 | Judge: Hon. Mark Snauffer 20 .I 21 ! I, John P. Kinsey, declare as follows: 22 | = I am a shareholder with the law firm of Wanger Jones Helsley PC,

24 | Association (collectively “Petitioners™). [ have personal knowledge of the following matters, 25 | except those stated on information and belief, and as to those matters [ believe them to be true, 26 l and if called as a witness in this proceeding, after being duly sworn, [ could and would 27 || competently testify thereto.

S O & N A

C. The Fees Incurred by Petitioners Are Reasonable preparing and litigating the fee application. I have exercised billing judgment to delete entries

' and not record entries where the time was not reasonably incurred, or where the time did not

Ji 12 | directly relate to this action. (A true and correct copy of the billing entries prepared I contemporaneously with the work performed, which were modified in non-substantive ways to

omit the disclosure of privileged information, are attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.)

15 I 21. The Administrative Record of Proceedings is extensive, consisting of 28 16 J volumes and 8,381 pages.

17 22 Petitioners engaged in lengthy and extensive briefing. During the course of this 18 || proceeding, Petitioners were required to respond to an unsuccessful demurrer filed by 19 || Respondents. On the merits, Petitioners were required to prepare an Opening Brief discussing 20 || numerous issues with a length of 37 pages, prepare a 20-page Reply Brief, and supplemental 21 || briefing following the hearing on the merits. Petitioners also spent considerable time 22 || reviewing Respondents’ briefs which consisted of a 33-page Opposition Brief and 10-page | 23 || Closing Brief.

24 5. Petitioners also engaged in lengthy preparation for the hearing on the Petition, 25 ’ which took place on September 18 and October 16, 2015.

26 24. Petitioners were also tasked with drafting the [Proposed] Statement of Decision, 5 I Judgment, and Writ of Mandate. The [Proposed] Statement of Decision was 39 pages in length. 28 |l ///

(6063/038/00633560 DOC) 6

DECLARATION OF JOHN P. KINSEY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AFTER JUDGMENT GRANTING

DECLARATION OF JOHN P. KINSEY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AFTER JUDGMENT GRANTING J 29, In this motion, Petitioners are not seeking approximately 16 hours of time spent 2 | by associate attorneys and shareholders, with a value of $9,000.00, as that was time I wrote off. 3 | 26. Petitioners are also not seeking in this motion $8,472.00 for 52.90 hours of | paralegal time spent preparing the Administrative Record of Proceedings in this matter, which

J 29, In this motion, Petitioners are not seeking approximately 16 hours of time spent 2 | by associate attorneys and shareholders, with a value of $9,000.00, as that was time I wrote off. 3 | 26. Petitioners are also not seeking in this motion $8,472.00 for 52.90 hours of | paralegal time spent preparing the Administrative Record of Proceedings in this matter, which

f were included in Petitioners’ Memorandum of Costs. Respondents did not file a motion to tax

|‘ costs.

i ' D. 8 l 27. I understand from personal experience that CEQA and APA cases can be 9 || complex from a technical standpoint, particularly in the context of state rulemakings where the 10 | decision oftentimes involves expert opinion, and technical and scientific data.

11 28. Petitioners successfully argued Respondents failed to prepare an adequate 12 ' (“SRIA”). As a relatively new requirement under the APA, however, there is little to no case 13 r law interpreting the adequacy of a public agency’s [Standardized Regulatory Impact 14 lIAssessment SRIA] or its assessment of the economic impacts of a proposed regulation on 15 j California business and individuals.

16 J 29. This matter also concerned issues regarding the appropriate baseline for 17 J environmental review, an area of rapidly evolving case law. (See Communities For A Better 18 j Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310; Neighbors 19 | for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line Const. Authority (2013) 57 Cal.4th 439; People for 20 J Proper Planning v. City of Palm Springs (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 640.) Petitioners were also 21 || able to condense several legally and scientifically complex issues concerning CARB'’s 22 I rulemaking into easily understood arguments.

23 § 30. Petitioners’ skill in successfully presenting these issues to the Court is an 24 'l indication of their counsels’ extensive experience litigating CEQA and APA matters, as

| explained above.

26 I /1 27 | /1

28 l /1 | {6063/038/00633560. DOC} 7

e s L DECI.LARATION OF JOHN P. KINSEY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AFTER JUDGMENT GRANTING

e s L DECI.LARATION OF JOHN P. KINSEY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AFTER JUDGMENT GRANTING j E. Other Issues

j E. Other Issues

31. On December 24, 2014, I provided notice to the Attorney General of the State

of California of the filing of the Second Amended Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, pursuant to Section 21167.7 of the Public Resources Code and Section 388 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a true and correct copy of

’ which is attached as Exhibit “C.”

f I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that

J the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on July €8, 2016, in

John P. Kinsey

, Fresno, California.