Costs Were Not Governed By CCP §§ 1032 or 998 Given How the Matter Was Tried. Feuding nephew beneficiaries of a trust set up by a widow without issue tried a case in probate court involving claims of undue influence, lack of capacity, and elder abuse. The judge hearing the case, by a […]
Public Importance of Case, Closeness of Issues, Plaintiff’s Limited Financial Resources, and Disparity in Parties’ Economic Power All Justified Costs Denial. The Ninth Circuit in Escriba v. Foster Poultry Farm, Inc., Case Nos. 11-17608/12-15320 (9th Cir. Feb. 25, 2014) (published) affirmed a jury verdict/district court judgment against a losing plaintiff, who earned $11,622
Defaulted Defendant, Although Getting Remand On Damages, Did Not Show Prevailing Party Status. Although somewhat intuitive, Justice Fybel in a case involving defaulted defendants confirmed a common sense result where a defaulted defendant, only winning a remand on damages on appeal, claimed he was the prevailing party entitled to routine costs at the
Answer: No Case On The Issue We Are Aware Of, But We Will Give Our Guess. A blog follower asked us if a small claims prevailing party can collect legal consultation expenses as “cost of the action” after prevailing—an apparent claim often made by winning small claims litigants. We could not locate
Trial Judge Committed No Abuse in Having Winner Chase 49 Individual Plaintiffs to Collect $2,700 Pro Rated Costs Rather Than the Whole Enchilada. In Aspell v. Mercury Casualty, Case No. B244501 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 13, 2014) (unpublished), an insurer obtained a jury verdict in its favor against 49 homeowners claiming they
Abuse of Discretion in Various Costs Orders Not Shown. Kronick v. Mackston, Case No. B245492 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Feb. 10, 2014) (unpublished) is a wild dog incident case in Corona Del Mar Park in Pacific Palisades. Plaintiff sued defendant claiming that defendant kicked her dog and then threatened plaintiff, while defendant countersued
To This Court, Unified In Interest Doctrine Alive And Well. Interesting to see jurisprudence to evolve, even in unpublished decisions. In Bedi v. Dhaliwal, Case Nos. A135784/A137061 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Jan. 27, 2014) (unpublished), the reviewing court had to discuss the “unified in interest” exception to awarding routine costs, with one
No Real Case Law on the Precise Issue, But Result is Logical to Appellate Court. Personalized Workout of La Jolla, Inc. v. Ravet, Case No. D061647 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 14, 2014) (unpublished) dealt with an interesting issue—whether plaintiffs winning fees/costs in a prior SLAPP proceeding were the parties with a “net
However, Attorney’s Fees Award Was Premature Until Judgment or Settlement Obtained Under Inverse Condemnation Fee-Shifting Provision. In an earlier appeal, Plaintiffs had obtained a reversal of a defense summary judgment in an inverse condemnation case, with the appellate court directing that the lower court consider a request for fees under Code of Civil
First Two Nonrecoverable Items, in Ninth Circuit Ruling, Depart From Federal Appeals Court Determinations to the Contrary. The Ninth Circuit in Kalitta Air L.L.C. v. Central Texas Airborne System Inc., Case No. 13-15015 (9th Cir. Dec. 19, 2013) (published) decided that “taxable” routine costs do not include (1) pro hac vice admission fees,
