Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 20STCV33913, Date: 2023-01-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV33913    Hearing Date: January 11, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiffs Ik Hoon Choi (“Ik Hoon”) and Hannah Choi (“Hannah”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendant Filippo Marchino (“Defendant”) for damages relating to a dog bite incident.  Plaintiff alleges that on June 16, 2019, Defendant’s dog bit Ik Hoon.  The complaint alleges a single cause of action for negligence by Plaintiffs against Defendant. 

On September 19, 2022, the Court heard and granted Defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to Hannah’s claim only against Defendant.  (Min. Order, Sept. 19, 2022.)  Thereafter, Defendant filed and served a Notice of Entry of Judgment providing notice of the order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.  On October 26, 2022, Defendant filed a Memorandum of Costs seeking $5,386.90 in total costs, which includes $1,017.97 for filing and motion fees, $150 for jury fees, $3,843.24 for deposition costs, $175.69 for service of process costs, and $200 for witness fees. 

On November 14, 2022, Plaintiffs filed an objection to Defendant’s Notice of Entry of Judgment,[1] and the instant motion to strike or tax costs.  Defendant opposes the motion, and Plaintiffs filed a reply.

Plaintiffs argue that a final judgment has not been entered in this matter, so Defendant’s memorandum of costs is premature.  Plaintiffs assert there are other issues that remain outstanding, namely Ik Hoon’s claims against Defendant, and any entry of judgment should be delayed until those issues are determined.  Further, Plaintiffs contend that Defendant failed to allocate his costs between Ik Hoon and Hannah, and that most of Defendant’s claimed costs were not reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation. 

In opposition, Defendant contends he is entitled to recover costs as a matter of law.  Defendant argues all costs were necessary to defend against Hannah’s claim, and that the costs were reasonable and necessary to prevail.  Defendant further asserts that the extent that judgment has not already been entered, the Court should now enter judgment because all of Hannah’s claims were disposed of on summary judgment.  Alternatively, Defendant requests that the Court continue the hearing on this matter so that judgment can be properly entered. 

            Plaintiffs, in reply, assert that Defendant acknowledges that his memorandum of costs is premature, and Plaintiffs argue that Defendant fails to cite any authority holding Hannah should bear all of Defendant’s costs. 

In this case, Plaintiffs contend that Defendant failed to file a proposed judgment, and that any entry of a final judgment should be delayed until Ik Hoon’s claims are resolved at trial.  Defendant, however, attests that on December 14, 2022, he submitted a letter with a proposed judgment.  The Court cannot locate any such proposed judgment in its records submitted by Defendant. 

Therefore, the hearing on this matter will be continued briefly for Defendant to properly file the proposed judgment concerning the ruling as to his summary judgment motion.  Defendant is ordered re-submit the proposed judgment within five days.  The hearing is continued to ________________ at 1:30 p.m. in this Department.  No further briefing is permitted. 

Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

• Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.
• If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.  
• Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.  
• If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. 

Dated this 11^th day of January 2023