Is appellant entitled to recover attorney fees under the common fund doctrine even if he did not confer a substantial benefit on the settlement class?

If appellant is suggesting he was entitled to recover his fees under the common fund doctrine even if he did not confer a substantial benefit on the settlement class, his own authority holds otherwise. (Cziraki v. Thunder Cats, Inc. (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 552 (Cziraki).) The issue in Cziraki was whether the "common fund and substantial benefit doctrines . . . permit an award of attorney fees in a derivative suit involving a close corporation with a small number of shareholders." (Id. at p. 557.) Concluding that these equitable doctrines could be invoked in a derivative shareholder action, the court repeatedly stated that both the common fund and substantial benefit theories require proof that the fee applicant conferred a "substantial benefit" on the class of shareholders that was distinct from his individual adverse interests. (Id. at pp. 560-561, 563.)