Deborah J. Fox 

As the chair of Meyers Nave’s First Amendment and trial & litigation practice groups, Deborah Fox frequently is called on to represent municipal governments in significant and unusual cases. A couple of years ago, she defeated a challenge to the way the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors selected a new member to fill an unexpected vacancy, and her victory was affirmed by the California Supreme Court.

In April, she defeated a very similar quo warranto lawsuit, this time on behalf of Alameda County supervisors. People v. Brown, 22CV015533 (Ala. Super. Ct., filed Aug. 3, 2022).

Fox has also successfully defended state-mandated “fair share” affordable housing requirements against lawsuits by cities and interest groups. In one case, the Court of Appeal held that the state’s housing allocation process is not subject to judicial review. City of Coronado v. San Diego Association of Governments, 80 Cal.App.5th 21 (Cal. App. 4th Dist., dec’d June 20, 2022).

She is now defending the Southern California Association of Governments against a new federal lawsuit by Huntington Beach asserting that state housing requirements violate the city’s constitutional rights. City of Huntington Beach v. Newsom, 8:23-cv-00421 (C.D. Cal., filed March 9, 2023).

But her biggest case since fall has her defending Santa Barbara County against a lawsuit from Southern California Edison. The utility wants the county to indemnify it for approximately $1.3 billion in settlements it is paying over property damaged or destroyed by the 2017 Thomas Fire and subsequent mudslides.

“They’re trying to turn the tables,” Fox said about Edison. “No homeowner sued the county. No business owner sued the county. But they are trying to redistribute the cost of the wildfires.” The utility’s lawsuit alleges the county and other agencies failed to develop the infrastructure needed or properly plan for disasters.

“This is the first time in all the wildfire litigation that a utility has come out affirmatively with a cross-complaint,” she said.

Argument on the county’s motion and others is set for later this month.

Fox handled one other unusual lawsuit this year. She represented the Alameda County Registrar of Voters in litigation over an error in counting ballots to fill a vacancy on the Oakland Unified School District’s board.

The election used ranked choice voting, but the registrar’s office mistakenly selected the wrong ranked choice tabulation method. After the error was spotted, the office recounted the ballots and discovered the winner had actually lost. But by that time, the election results had been certified. “The registrar of voters had no authority to do anything without court imprimatur,” Fox said.

The candidate who should have won sued. After a hand count matched the adjusted count, the “winner” resigned and agreed to a stipulated judgment putting the right man in office, she said. Hutchinson v. Resnick, 23CV025271 (Ala. Super. Ct., filed Jan. 6, 2023).

“It was interesting to learn there are different ways that other states count ranked choice voting,” Fox said. “You learn a lot here.”

— Don DeBenedictis