In Gregory v. State Bd. of Control (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 584, a crime victim filed a mandate petition and a complaint for declaratory relief after her request for compensation under the Victims of Crime Restitution Program was denied. The State Board of Control (Board) had denied her claim because no crime report had been submitted. The trial court found the board had a duty to itself obtain the crime report. On appeal, the board challenged the trial court's attorneys' fee award under section 1021.5. The Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District, Division One, held: "We cannot say there was any abuse of discretion here. The claimant was unquestionably the 'successful party,' as she obtained the declaratory and writ relief she sought. Further, the claimant's action conferred a significant benefit on the general public. She produced undisputed evidence the Board had a long-standing blanket practice of shirking its duty to subpoena full crime reports from law enforcement agencies refusing to voluntarily comply with the law, and it was 'the practice and policy of the Board's staff to recommend denial of a victim's application for assistance if no crime report is submitted to, or obtained by . . . staff.'. . . The benefit the claimant's action conferred is the proper interpretation of Victims Program provisions and related regulations and the Board's forced compliance with its mandatory duty to obtain full crime reports . . . ." ( Id. at pp. 598-599.)