Second District, Division 7 Agrees with Sister Court that Costs Are Awardable if Reasonably Necessary to the Conduct of the Litigation Based on Analogous Out-of-County Counsel Cases.
In Jessen v. Mentor Corp., Case No. B210059 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Nov. 17, 2009) (unpublished), the Second District, Division 7 agreed with the Fourth District, Division 1 that out-of-county counsel’s deposition travel expenses may be awarded as routine costs if reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation under Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5(c)(2). See Seever v. Copley Press, Inc., 141 Cal.App.4th 1550, 1560 (2006); Thon v. Thompson, 29 Cal.App.4th 1546, 1548 (1994). Then, the Jessen court found no problem extending the reasoning of these cases to out-of-state counsel’s deposition travel expenses: “There is no more reason to restrict a prevailing party’s recovery of deposition travel costs simply because the lawyer crosses state borders to attend a deposition than there is when he or she travels from Northern or Central California to Los Angeles. In either case the touchstone is whether the costs sought are necessary and reasonable.” (Slip Opn., at p. 6.)