Plaintiff Did Not Subsequently Renew His Objections At The Trial Level, Meaning The Addition Of Costs Was A Ministerial Act Rather Than A Substantial Amendment to the Judgment. Max v. Shih, Case No. B322716 (2d Dist., Div. 1 July 27, 2023) (unpublished) is a situation which reminds counsel to renew motions to strike costs, […]
Lots Of Moving Parts Here, But The Remand For Environmental Parties Is Not An Automatic Endorsement Of Receiving 1021.5 Fees. City of San Clemente v. Department of Transportation et al., Case No. E077153 (4th Dist., Div. 2 June 29, 2023) (published) arose out of the Corridor Agency’s approved extension of State Route 241 (known
However, Appeal Sanctions Were Denied Because They Were Improperly Sought In Respondent’s Brief, Rather Than Through A Separate Motion. The next case, Black v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., Case No. A165731 (1st Dist., Div. 1 May 11, 2023) (unpublished), has two lessons, where a prevailing party did obtain an amended judgment to add unopposed
Counsel Press Expenses Were Allowed, With Unsuccessful Motions Still Entitled To Allowance. In Kleidman v. Feeva Technology, Inc., Case No. H049681 (6th Dist. May 10, 2023) (unpublished), the losing party challenged $1,500 in appellate costs for printing and copying briefs, arguing that it included motion and other pleadings (not just briefs) and that it
1/4 DCA Follows Ladas On The Computerized Legal Research Issue. Kung v. Carthy, Case No. A161965 (1st Dist., Div. 4 May 3, 2023) (unpublished) considered whether computerized legal research costs and electronic hosting expenses (expenses not expressly approved by the trial judge) are reimbursable. Number 1 was decided to not be a reimbursable cost,
The Appellate Win Did Not Allow For Prevailing Party Fees, Because The Ultimate Litigation Outcome Result Was Dispositive—No One Prevailed. The next case, Waterwood Enterprises, LLC v. City of Long Beach, Case No. B316269 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 26, 2023) (unpublished) had a topsy-turvy procedural history, but it at long last has seemed
Lower Court Also Granted Plaintiff CCP § 473 Relief From A Late-Filed Motion To Tax Costs, But No Costs Could Be Recovered Given Plaintiff’s Waiver By Failing To File A Costs Memo. The procedural events in Cielo Homeowners Assn. v. Bennett, Case No. D079743 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 10, 2023) (unpublished) were, to
Losing Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Denied Private Attorney General Fee Request In Opinion With Several Cross-Over Issues. Direct Action Everywhere SF Bay Area etc. v. Diestel Turkey Ranch, Case No. A162702 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 1, 2023) (unpublished) is an opinion with many cross-over issues as identified in our main title to this post. In
Waiver Principles, Pure And Simple. Brady v. Clark, Case No. E078212 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 8, 2023) (unpublished) is a simple reminder for litigants—if you are claiming routine costs as a prevailing party, file a timely costs memorandum; and, if you are going to oppose a dueling costs memorandum against you, you need
Costs For Non-Expert Treating Physicians And Exhibit Work By Law Firm Regularly Salaried Employee Were Not Proper Subjects Of An Award. Plaintiff husband (and his wife to some extent) were awarded over $3.7 million in a vehicular personal injury action against defendant, with the lower court later awarding plaintiff $322,812 in costs (out of
