A New Tool For Challenging Attorneys' Fee Awards In Housing Project Litigation

The expectation that prevailing petitioners would recover attorneys' fees has long been a significant motivating factor for bringing CEQA and entitlement challenges. This prospect has not only made litigation available to petitioners who may not otherwise have the means to sue, but has also added to the risk and expense for anyone proposing to develop in California. A recent decision interpreting a relatively new provision in the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”), however, signals a meaningful shift in this dynamic.

Coalition of Pacificans for an Updated Plan v. City Council of Pacifica (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 30, 2025) (“Coalition of Pacificans”) is the first published case interpreting the recently-enacted HAA provision that alters the factors courts weigh when deciding whether to grant attorneys' fees in litigation challenging the approval of housing projects. The case explains that petitioners can no longer depend on being awarded their attorneys' fees when they