This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Torts
Declaratory Relief
Refund of Fees and Fines Improperly Collected Pursuant to Pasadena's "Pay & Display" Parking System

Geoffrey Frank, an individual, and all others similarly-situated; Devin Swanson, an individual, and all others similarly-situated; and Babak Zahabizadeh, an individual, and all others similarly-situated v. City of Pasadena

Published: Jun. 3, 2022 | Result Date: Nov. 19, 2021 | Filing Date: Jun. 26, 2017 |

Case number: BC666535 Settlement –  Non-monetary relief

Judge

William F. Highberger

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Vincent H. Herron
(Halpern, May, Ybarra & Gelberg LLP)

Michael Bruce Abelson
(Halpern, May, Ybarra & Gelberg LLP)


Defendant

Edwin J. Richards Jr.
(Kutak Rock LLP)

Antoinette P. Hewitt
(Kutak Rock LLP)

Michele B. Bagneris
(Office of the Pasadena City Attorney)


Facts

In 2014, City of Pasadena ("City") implemented a "Pay & Display" parking system, which required parkers to purchase and display a time-stamped ticket from a curbside Kiosk. The Kiosk charged between $0.75 to $1.25 for parking in hour-long increments. If a parker failed to purchase or display the time-stamped ticket or that the parking exceeded the printed time limit on the ticket, an "expired meter" citation would be issued to the parker. Each violation could be assessed for a penalty at $45 and above. Unused time was not to be refunded to parker. Plaintiffs, acting as class representatives, brought a class action against City.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs alleged that the Pay & Display Meters in the City of Pasadena may not collect parking fees because it did not meet the definition of a "parking meter" under Pasadena Municipal Code Section 10.08.075. Plaintiffs also sought declarative relief by contending that City's use of the parking kiosks and collection of the parking fees were not authorized by Vehicle Code Section 22508(a).

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTION: Defendant claimed that the Pay & Display Meters properly falls within the definition of "parking meters" under the Municipal Code Section 10.08.075. Defendant also argued that one of the name plaintiffs failed to exhaust his administrative remedies under Vehicle Code section 40215 and that the right he claimed was limited to the administrative and judicial remedies set forth in Vehicle Code section 40200, et seq.

Settlement Discussions

Parties conducted mediation via Zoom with Judge Peter D. Lichtman (Ret.) and reached settlement.

Result

The case settled, whereby the City agreed to, among others: provide an annual training session on the citation appeal process to City parking administrative staff and hearing officers, investigate all parking citations that were overturned to determine whether a systematic change to the parking system is appropriate to comply with the law, increase the grace period and prevent issuance of violation tickets during the grace period, ensure the synchronization of the time between the meters and the handheld devices, inform parkers the option to transfer unused meter time to other meters in the City, and dismiss all unpaid citations related to the Pay & Display Meters issued to class members.


#138865

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390