Costs Taxed for Korean Interpreters and Discovery Referee Expenses.
Plaintiff, an ex-employee, did win compensatory and some punitive damages from his former employer, doing so through a complaint that included a lost wage claim. Winner then requested $260,817.60 in attorney’s fees under Labor Code section 218.5, a pro-plaintiff lost wage fee-shifting statute, and $20,544.10 in costs. The lower court only awarded fees of $60,000 and trimmed $13,451.50 in costs relating to Korean interpreters and a discovery referee.
The Second District, Division One, in a 3-0 opinion authored by Justice Johnson, affirmed in Hong v. Life University, Case No. B226987 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 15, 2012) (unpublished).
Losing former employer argued this was only a contract action with no fees clause, so than any fee recovery was inappropriate. Not so, said the appellate panel. Labor Code section 218.5 expressly applies to “any action” on lost wages, which plainly includes a breach of contract action. Praying for fees in the body of the complaint put the defense on notice that fees were being claimed.
However, winning ex-employee lost his arguments on getting a larger fee award or recouping the interpreter/discovery referee expenses. The trial court did not have to issue a statement of decision, but did orally indicate at the hearing that the requested amount was inflated, including $14,250 to prepare a fee petition. No abuse of discretion in so finding. With respect to costs, plaintiff failed to submit interpreter invoices, and the lower court was justified in believing that he had agreed to split the discovery referee fees as a matter of agreement that bound him on appeal.
Although the appeal had no merit, frivolous sanctions were denied, with the appellate panel reminding us that the correct way to go about this is filing a noticed motion for sanctions with the respondent’s brief. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.276(b)(1); Cowan v. Krayzman, 196 Cal.App.4th 907, 919 (2011).)