Cases: Costs

Costs/Prevailing Party: Trial Court’s Dismissal Of Case Based On Worker’s Compensation Exclusivity Defense Did Not Deprive It Of Jurisdiction To Award Costs To Prevailing Party

Cases: Costs, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Workers' Compensation

Fifth District So Decides, But Lays Down No Absolute Rule On Subject Matter Jurisdiction Issue.      Brown v. Desert Christian Center, Case No. F060139 (5th Dist. Mar. 17, 2011) (certified for publication) involved a personal injury that was dismissed on the jurisdictional defense that the involved injuries were within the exclusive province of the worker’s […]

Costs: Behr v. Redmond Now A Published Decision

Cases: Costs

  Genital Herpes Case With Costs Ruling Certified for Publication.      In our March 2, 2011 post, we discussed Behr v. Redmond, Case No. E04833 (4th Dist., Div. 2 March 2, 2011), a genital herpes case in which a costs award for expert witness fees was reversed because no CCP § 998 offer was proven

Section 1717/Costs: Another Two-Fer . . . . Gotta Have A Substantive Basis To Claim Recovery Of Attorney’s Fees Or Expert Witness Fees As Costs

Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 1717

ABC-Learn, Inc. v. Coronado, Case No. B219107 (2d Dist., Div. 2 March 2, 2011) (Unpublished).      In this one, a prevailing defendant appealed a lower court’s denial of his request to recoup $136,140 in attorney’s fees under a commercial lease dispute involving a lease agreement and unsigned purchase agreement/joint escrow instructions. The problem here was

Costs Two-Fer: Court Has Discretion To Deny Costs To Parties Unified In Interest And Wrong Zip Code Will Invalidate Mailing Notice For Costs Memorandum

Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 998

  “Unity of Interest” Doctrine Gives Discretion To Lower Courts in Awarding Costs.      In Toland v. Arredondo, Case Nos. F058619/F059182 (5th Dist. Mar. 1, 2011) (unpublished), one plaintiff was awarded $114,590 and another was awarded $12,585 by a jury against a corporate defendant, although an individual defendant (unified in interest with the corporate defendant)

Costs/Section 998: Motion To Correct Earlier Costs Award Rejected, With Aggrieved Party Needing To Appeal Or Bring Motion To Vacate

Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 998

Failure to Appeal Earlier Judgment Was Critical, With Motion to Correct Not Being the Right Move.      Boteach v. Botach, Case No. B224823 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Feb. 24, 2011) (unpublished) is interesting for purposes of demonstrating that a litigant not liking an earlier costs ruling needs to appeal or bring a motion to vacate.

Costs/998 Offers: Defense Beating Its Own 998 Offer Got A Nice Reward–$369,850 Costs Award Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Costs, Cases: Settlement

  Second District, Division 4 Rebuffs Multiple Challenges to Costs Award by Losing Plaintiff.      We have often discussed how fee awards can be substantial and crippling; however, costs award can have the same sting, especially when substantial expert witness fees are shifted because a plaintiff rejected a CCP § 998 offer that the defense

Costs/Settlement: With Prejudice Dismissal Of Complaint Meant Costs Recovery Was Mandatory For Prevailing Defendant

Cases: Costs, Cases: Settlement

  Settlement Agreement Had No Waiver of Costs, Which Led to Reversal of an Order Denying Costs.      There definitely is a practice lesson is the next case where a prevailing defendant obtained reversal of an order striking/taxing routine costs in postjudgment proceedings.      Robertson v. St. John, Case No G043635 (4th Dist., Div. 3

Trade Secrets/Costs: Bad Faith Trade Secret Sanctions Of Fees And Costs Cannot Be Imposed Against Party’s Counsel

Cases: Costs, Cases: Trade Secrets

  Second District, Division 2 Finds Silence In Fee Shifting Statute Does Not Translate Into Legislative Intent to Impose Fees and Costs on Counsel.      We have seen a recent surge in cases where appellate courts have reversed trial court decisions imposing fees and costs against a party’s counsel under certain fee shifting or sanction

Allocation/Reasonableness Of Fees/Special Fee Shifting Statutes/Lodestar/Multiplier/Costs/Standard Of Review: Lower Court Did Abuse Discretion In Awarding Certain Expenses As Fees, In Failing To Allocate, And In Applying A Multiplier

Cases: Costs, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Standard of Review

Abuse of Discretion Standard Did Not Prevent Reversal When Record Showed Errors, According to Sixth District.      In an interesting contrast to the way the abuse of discretion standard was deferentially applied in our contemporaneous post in Murrell v. Rolling Hills Community Association, the Sixth District found that the trial court abused its discretion in

Section 998/Routine Costs: 998 Offer Not In Bad Faith And Routine Costs Are in Order Except for FedEx Charge

Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 998

Court of Appeal Disagrees that FedEx Charge Allowable Under Costs Statute as “Postage” Charge Equivalent.      Many of the decisions we review are fairly technical, and the next one is no exception. It does show that 998 offer rejection decisions will be reviewed for abuse of discretion, but that costs decisions on legal entitlement will

Scroll to Top