Judge: Glenda Sanders, Case: 2011-00511808, Date: 2022-09-09 Tentative Ruling

1. Motion to Strike

2. Status Conference (Remains on calendar)

Motion to Strike

Plaintiffs seek an order striking or taxing various costs sought by Defendants pursuant to the Amended Cost Memorandum filed 3/24/22 (ROA 2100). The motion is granted in part and denied in part.

Plaintiffs argue that Defendants were not the prevailing party in the overall action. The Court disagrees. But even if they were not, Defendants are entitled to costs on appeal because the Court of Appeal specifically stated: “Respondents [Defendants are] to recover costs on appeal.”  (ROA 2039, p. 32).

The Court taxes Defendants’ cost Item 1 by $390, which represents a duplicate filing fee which Defendants concede was already refunded to them.

While Plaintiffs assert that certain costs were initially miscategorized by Defendants, Plaintiffs do not explain how more time would allow them to better respond to Defendants’ request for those costs. Nor do they point to any prejudice to Plaintiffs due to initial mis-categorization.

The thrust of Plaintiffs’ remaining argument is that the costs incurred were not necessary, but were rather incurred for the convenience of Defendants. However, when costs on appeal are involved, it is not the function of the trial court to determine whether the costs were necessary. (Alan S. v. Superior Ct. (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 238, 261-262 as modified (Apr. 2, 2009), as modified (Apr. 15, 2009)). Defendants have provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the costs were incurred, and the amounts appear reasonable. (See Williams Decl., Exhs. A-C).

The Court declines to tax Defendants’ costs any further than as stated above.

Plaintiffs to give notice.

Please inform the clerk by emailing her before 12:00 p.m. on the day of the hearing at CX101@occourts.org if both parties intend to submit on the tentative.