Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 20STCV08464, Date: 2023-05-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV08464    Hearing Date: July 10, 2023    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

DEPARTMENT 17

 

TENTATIVE RULING

 

DOMINGO LOZA

                          

         vs.

 

KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC.

 

                                         

 Case No.:  20STCV08464

 

 

 

 Hearing Date:  July 10, 2023

 

 

Defendant’s motion for relief is GRANTED.

 

On 3/2/2020, Plaintiff Domingo Loza filed suit against Kia Motors America, Inc. alleging: (1) breach of express warranty; (2) breach of implied warranty; and (3) violation of the Song Beverly Act section 1793.2.

 

            Now, Defendant moves for relief from the ruling issued on 3/27/2023 awarding Plaintiff costs in the sum of $84,917.69, based on Defendant’s own mistake and excusable neglect. 

 

Discussion 

 

            On 3/27/2023, the Court granted in part, denied in part Defendant’s motion to tax Plaintiff’s costs. As such, the overall cost amount sought, $89,695.27, was reduced to $84,917.69.

 

            Now, Defendant argues that:

 

Attorney Bradley E. Rankell drafted KA's Motion to Tax Plaintiff's Costs and KA's Reply in support of the Motion. He was not, however, involved in the case in January 2022, when KA served its Offer to Compromise. Through mistake, inadvertence, surprise and/or excusable neglect Mr. Rankell did not realize that KA had served an Offer to Compromise and did not realize that Plaintiff’s costs and expenses are limited to $4,333.50, the amount of costs and expenses incurred by Plaintiff as of January 20, 2022.

 

            (Motion, 3:4-9.)

 

CCP section 473, subdivision (b), provides in pertinent part: "The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. Application for this relief shall be accompanied by a copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, otherwise the application shall not be granted, and shall be made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken."

 

Here, Mr. Rankell submitted a declaration stating that through his own mistake, he did not realize KA had served an Offer to Compromise and did not realize that Plaintiff’s costs and expenses should be limited to, the amount of costs and expenses incurred by Plaintiff as of January 20, 2022, pursuant to CCP section 998 (c)(1). (See Rankell Decl.)

 

The Court agrees that relief is warranted. While Mr. Rankell’s conduct was negligent, CCP section 998 sets out clear statutory directives as to what costs may be recovered by law after a 998 offer is made and rejected. As such, the amount of costs Plaintiff is entitled to is not discretionary. To allow Plaintiff to preserve the awarded windfall in costs, based on Defendant’s counsel’s negligence, would be to allow Plaintiff to obtain more than she is entitled to by law. Such a result runs counter to interests of justice and equity.

 

In Le Francois v. Goel (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1094 that even when CCP section 1008 precludes a party from moving for reconsideration, a trial court has inherent authority to correct an erroneous ruling on its own motion. As such, the Court finds that CCP section 1008 does not preclude relief here.

 

Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s motion for relief is granted.

 

It is so ordered.

 

Dated:  July    , 2023

                                                                                                                                                          

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

 

 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.