Cases: Costs

Routine Costs: Prevailing Cross-Defendant Denied Costs Where Defendant/Cross-Complainant Obtained Relief Under Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant’s Complaint

Cases: Costs

Fourth District, Division 2 Affirms Trial Court’s Award of No Costs to Cross-Defendant.      Plaintiff Gonzales brought a complaint against defendant Falzone involving various investment/partnership disputes, with Falzone filing a cross-complaint against Gonzales. After a bench trial, Falzone obtained relief under Gonzales’ complaint but was granted no relief under his cross-complaint. The trial court also […]

Private Attorney General Statute: Northern California District Judge Awards CCP Section 1021.5 Fees Of $1,423,127 To Plaintiffs Recovering $153,150 Against Taser Manufacturer

Cases: Costs, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

Judge Refuses to Apply a Multiplier and Denies Costs to Successful City in Same Lawsuit.      Robert C. Heston, Jr. died after Tasers were deployed against him by Salinas police officers, death resulting in the aftermath of cardiac arrest. His mother/father and estate executor sued Salinas, the individual police officers, and TASER International (the manufacturer

Dog Lovers Beware—If Have a Service Dog That You Need To Bring To Court, Make Sure It Sits Down and Does Not Bother Jurors—Or Hire The Dog Whisperer

Cases: Costs

  In Pro Per Disabled Plaintiff Has Case Dismissed and Suffers Adverse $422,487.04 Costs Award Against Him.      The next case, although involving convoluted and far from mundane facts, should be of interest to dog lovers, and to tooth and claw litigators. As far as our blog is concerned, it reminds all plaintiffs—especially in pro

Prevailing Individual Defendant In Employment Retaliation Case Awarded Substantial Routine Costs After Rejected 998 Offer Of $1.179 Million 998 Offer Found Reasonable In Nature

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs, Cases: Section 998

  Fourth District, Division 3 Affirms Costs Award in Favor of Winning Individual Defendant.      If you are a plaintiff suing for employment retaliation, do not think that the suit carries little risks. Routine, non-fee costs of a substantial nature can still be assessed against you. Also, you as the plaintiff need to seriously evaluate

Routine Costs: Amended Verification Allowed By Trial Court “Related Back” To Filing Of Initially Defective Costs Verification

Cases: Costs

  Third District Finds Defect Was Not Jurisdictional in Unpublished Decision.      California Rules of Court, rule 3.1700 contains provisions relating to deadlines and requirements for filing and serving costs memoranda by prevailing litigants. Some of the requirements are: (1) a verification about accuracy of costs must be based on the declarant’s knowledge; (2) the

Civil Code Section 1717: Fee Award Reversed Because Prevailing Party Determination Is Different Than The Standard For Adjudging An Award Of Routine Costs

Cases: Allocation, Cases: Costs, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717

Second District, Division 7 Remands for Further Fee Proceedings.      City of Los Angeles won attorney’s fees against a replacement contractor selected by a bonding surety, where surety and replacement contractor entered into contractual agreements incorporating original agreements between City and the replaced contractor. Replacement contractor lost in the construction litigation, with the trial court

Costs: Order Directing Set Aside of Settlement Funds Based On Costs Award Results In Issuance Of Appellate Mandate Writ

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Costs

Second District, Division 2 Overturns Set Aside Order, But Does Not Pass on Validity of Lien.      A defense judgment involving a costs award is usually automatically stayed without bond pending an appeal by the impacted party, such that execution efforts cannot go forward until the appeal is final. (Vadas v. Sosnowski, 210 Cal.App.3d 471,

Costs: Costs Memorandum Does Not Have To Be Verified Under Penalty Of Perjury

Cases: Costs

Second District, Division Four Sustains Use of Judicial Council Form As Proper.      Moghadam v. The Regents of the Univ. of Cal., Case Nos. B194314 & B196120 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Dec. 19, 2008) (certified for partial publication) involved an interesting issue of whether UC Regents’ refusal to allow inspection of student exams violated the

FEHA: Losing Plaintiff Suffers Adverse Costs Award, With No Need To Weigh Whether Plaintiff Has The Ability to Pay

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Costs

  Fourth District, Division One Rejects Engrafting Rosenman Requirements Into Routine Costs Proceedings.      In our earlier posts of December 11, 2008 on Trisler and December 16, 2008 on Young, we discussed the Rosenman requirements in FEHA cases: the trial court must make specific written findings as to why the action was frivolous and about

Routine Costs: Trial Judge Found To Have Inferentially Granted 30-Day Extension to File Costs Memorandum When Granting Costs Where Memorandum Untimely Filed Under CRC 3.1700(a)

Cases: Costs, Cases: Deadlines

Fourth District, Division One Also Finds Untimeliness Argument Waived, But Also Decides Merits in Favor of Costs Claimant.      California Rules of Court, rule 3.1700(a)(1) does contain a time deadline for filing and service of a costs memorandum after mailing of notice of entry of judgment or dismissal—15 days. The lower court has also discretion

Scroll to Top