Costs and sanctions are generally discretionary matters, even if the record might show a different conclusion could have been reached. Appellate courts are loathe to disturb a trial court’s conclusion in such matters, as Sdun v. Patterson, Case No. C070623 (3d Dist. Feb. 18, 2015) (unpublished) aptly illustrates.
There, plaintiffs won a quiet title/trespass case against defendant over a boundary line dispute involving Sacramento property. The lower court did award plaintiffs some costs for an uncalled expert witness and some sanctions for defendant bringing an untimely discovery sanctions motion claiming that the expert designation of the other side was “sham” in nature.
These determinations were affirmed on appeal. Given that defendant did not beat a CCP § 998 offer, it was no abuse of discretion for the lower court to award $250 for his expert witness fees, even though the expert was far from a great witness at deposition and was not called at trial. (Evers v. Cornelson, 163 Cal.App.3d 310, 317 (1984).) With respect to the sanctions award of $1,108.29 against defendant, this was justified because the defense discovery abuse sanctions motion was untimely, meaning plaintiff should be compensated for having to successfully oppose it—getting counter-sanctions against the defense.