The Supreme Court has posted its statement of the issue on review in County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court (ARCO), no. S163681. It is short and to the point:
This case presents the following issue: May a public entity retain private counsel to prosecute a public nuisance abatement action under a contingent fee agreement?
It is interesting that the issue is specifically stated in terms of the public nuisance cause of action. I've been following this case because of its potential to impact public prosecutor UCL actions. We'll just have to wait (for about two years) and see how broadly the opinion ends up being worded.
This case has been added to my list of pending Supreme Court cases.