Judge Daniel M. Crowley, Case Number: BC703825, Date: 2025-03-10 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Eunices Argueta’s unopposed motion for entry of a judgment on her costs on appeal is granted. The Court enters a judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant in the amount of $4,365.18 for Plaintiff’s costs on appeal.

Plaintiff Eunices Argueta (“Argueta”) (“Plaintiff”) moves unopposed for entry of a judgment on her costs on appeal based on the following grounds: (1) Plaintiff successfully appealed the adverse judgment in this case; (2) The majority panel of the Second District Court of Appeal, Division Eight and the Remittitur stated that Defendant Worldwide Flight Services, Inc. (“Worldwide”) (“Defendant”) is to pay Plaintiff’s costs on appeal; (3) Defendant did not move to strike or tax Plaintiff’s costs on appeal; (4) Plaintiff made numerous requests that Defendant pay Plaintiff’s costs on appeal, to no avail; and (5) California law authorizes a separate judgment on appellate costs, entitling Plaintiff to a judgment on those costs in the amount of $4,365.18. (Notice Motion, pg. 2; CRC, Rule 8.278.)

Plaintiff successfully appealed the judgment in the case. In its opinion, the majority panel of the Second District Court of Appeal, Division Eight stated “Respondent to pay costs on appeal.” (Argueta v. Worldwide Flight Services, Inc. (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 822, 842, reh’g denied Dec. 6, 2023, review denied Mar. 20, 2024.) In its Remittitur, the Court of Appeal made the same statement.

On April 18, 2024, Plaintiff timely filed a Memorandum of Costs on Appeal in the amount of $4,365.18. Defendant did not move to strike or tax Plaintiff’s costs. Despite repeated requests that Defendant pay Plaintiff’s appellate costs, Defendant never paid them.

Plaintiff filed the instant motion on November 6, 2024. As of the date of this hearing no opposition has been filed.

CRC, Rule 8.278(a)(1) provides that “[e]xcept as provided in this rule or by statute, the party prevailing in the Court of Appeal in a civil case other than a juvenile case is entitled to costs on appeal.” (CRC, Rule 8.278(a)(1).) CRC, Rule 8.278(b)(1) provides, “[t]he clerk/executive officer of the Court of Appeal must enter on the record, and insert in the remittitur, a judgment awarding costs to the prevailing party under (a)(2) or as directed by the court under (a)(3), (a)(4), or (a)(5).” (CRC, Rule 8.278(b)(1).)

CRC, Rule 8.278(c)(1) states that “[w]ithin 40 days after issuance of the remittitur, a party claiming costs awarded by a reviewing court must serve and file in the superior court a verified memorandum of costs under rule 3.1700.” (CRC, Rule 8.278(c)(1).) CRC, Rule 8.278(c)(2) states that “[a] party may serve and file a motion in the superior court to strike or tax costs claimed under (1) in the manner required by rule 3.1700.” (CRC, Rule 8.278(c)(2).) CRC, Rule 8.278(c)(3) states that “[a]n award of costs is enforceable as a money judgment.” (CRC, Rule 8.278(c)(3).)

The award of appellate costs is a separate judgment. (Rostack Investments, Inc. v. Sabella (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 70, 78-79.) “A judgment for costs on appeal is a complete judgment in itself that may be enforced by execution prior to the entry of final judgment. (O’Hare v. Peacock Dairies (1938) 28 Cal.App.2d 562, 564.) “An award of costs on appeal is a complete judgment in itself that finds its origin in the order of the appellate or the supreme court.” (Id. at 564.) “There is no interdependence between the judgment for costs of the former appeal and any judgment which may subsequently be entered in the main case.” (First National Bank v. Stansbury (1931) 214 Cal. 190, 192.)

Here, Plaintiff was the prevailing party on appeal and is entitled to her appellate costs of $4,365.18 because in its published opinion, the majority panel in Division Eight of the Second District Court of Appeal specified that Defendant is to pay Plaintiff’s costs on appeal. (Argueta, 97 Cal.App.5th at pg. 842 [“Respondent to pay costs on appeal.”].) The Court of Appeal’s Remittitur echoed that statement. (4/4/24 Remittitur [“Respondent to pay costs on appeal.”].); On April 18, 2024, Plaintiff timely filed a Memorandum of Costs on Appeal and Defendant did not move to strike or tax those costs, making the award of costs enforceable as a money judgment. (CRC, Rule 8.278(c).)

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is granted. The Court enters a judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant in the amount of $4,365.18 for Plaintiff’s costs on appeal.

Hon. Daniel M. Crowley

Judge of the Superior Court