Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: BC715051, Date: 2023-08-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC715051    Hearing Date: March 4, 2024    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s motion to tax costs is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED as to $146.45 in “Other” costs, but is DENIED in all other respects.    

On July 30, 2018, Plaintiff Farbod Melamed (Plaintiff) filed suit against Parallax Health Sciences, Inc., Edward W. Withrow III, Calli Bucci, and Shala Melamed (collectively, Defendants). On November 19, 2018, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint (FAC) against Defendants, alleging: (1) failure to pay wages; (2) failure to indemnify; (3) wrongful termination; (4) retaliation—Government Code 12940, subdivision (h); (5) retaliation—Labor Code section 6310; (6) retaliation—Labor Code section 1102.5; (7) fraud; (8) failure to produce employee file; (9) failure to provide wage statements;  and (10) harassment.

            Now, Plaintiff moves to tax $7,637.28 in Defendant’s costs.

Discussion

            Plaintiff seeks to tax the following costs:

-         $2,061.30 for costs of “Court Reporter for Hearings”

-         $864.86 for costs of “Advanced Attorney Service”

-         $437.25 for costs of “Copies of Trial Exhibits”

-         $146.45 for costs of “Other”

-         $1, 170.0 for costs of “CourtCall/Remote Appearance”

-         $1,039.30 for costs of process on counsel

-         $50.00 for service of process on Ferring Research Institute

-         $1,820.12 for non-itemized electronic filing or service

As for the first challenged cost, Court reporter fees as established by statute are expressly recoverable costs. (Code Civ. 4 Proc. § 1033.5(a)(l1).) Defendant’s opposition sets forth a table showing the individual fees that total $2,061.30. Accordingly, the Court finds these costs were reasonably and actually incurred.

As for the second challenged cost, it is well settled messenger services are properly awarded in the discretion of the court. (Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007) 149 10 Cal.App.4th 836, 858.) Here, Defendant’s counsel set forth an itemization that shows that these services were reasonably incurred to provide courtesy copies as required by this Department.  Accordingly, the Court finds these costs were reasonably and actually incurred.

As for the third challenged cost, trial exhibits are recoverable under CCP section 1033.5(c). Defendant set forth evidence showing the itemized fees that totally the $437.25 in costs. Accordingly, the Court finds these costs were reasonably and actually incurred.

As for the fourth challenged cost, Defendant concedes that she is not able to prove these costs at this time. Accordingly, the Court strikes $146.45 for “Other” costs.

As for the fifth challenged cost, Court Call and remote appearance fees are discretionary. Notably, the Court awarded Plaintiff costs related to Court Call and remote appearances. The Court agrees that it was reasonable and necessary for Defendant to have her San-Diego based attorney attend as many remote hearings as he could. Accordingly, the Court finds these costs were reasonably and actually incurred. Accordingly, the Court finds these costs were reasonably and actually incurred.

As for the sixth challenged cost, Defendant submitted evidence to corroborate the service of process fee on Ferring Research Institute. Accordingly, the Court finds this cost was reasonably and actually incurred.

As for the sixth challenged cost, Defendant set an itemized electronic filing/service list, and has shown that each cost was actually incurred.  Accordingly, the Court finds this cost was reasonably and actually incurred.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion to tax costs is granted in part, denied in part. Plaintiff’s motion is granted as to $146.45 in “Other” costs, but is denied in all other respects. 

It is so ordered.

Dated:  March    , 2024

   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.