Judge Katherine Chilton, Case LAM15K12957 2022-12-14 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Katherine Chilton, Case: LAM15K12957, Date: 2022-12-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: LAM15K12957 Hearing Date: December 14, 2022 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Alejandro Diaz

RESP. PARTY: Defendants B.I.G. Group, etc.

MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT

(CCP § 187)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Alejandro Diaz’s Motion to Amend Judgment is GRANTED. Judgment, entered on May 8, 2017, is hereby amended to include $4,000.00 in damages, $5,715.00 in attorney’s fees, and $1,405.00 in costs.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: Filed on November 29, 2022. [ ] Late [ ] None

REPLY: None filed as of December 12, 2022 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

I. Background

On October 20, 2015, Plaintiff Alejandro Diaz (“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Defendants B.I.G. Group (B.I.G.), Annie Taing (“Taing”), and Jimmy Meng (“Meng”) (collectively “Defendants”) for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

On April 28, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Memorandum of Costs seeking $1,405.00 in costs.

On May 8, 2017, Judgment was entered for Plaintiff in the amount of $4,000.00 in damages. (5-8-17 Judgment.)

On May 18, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Attorney’s Fees. The Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees in the amount of $5,715.00 on October 10, 2017. (10-10-17 Minute Order.)

On September 13, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Amend Judgment (“Motion”). On November 29, 2022, Defendants filed an Opposition to the Motion. No reply has been filed.

II. Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure § 187 states: “[w]hen jurisdiction is, by the Constitution or this Code, or by any other statute, conferred on a Court or judicial officer, all the means necessary to carry it into effect are also given; and in the exercise of this jurisdiction, if the course of proceeding be not specifically pointed out by this Code or the statute, any suitable process or mode of proceeding may be adopted which may appear most conformable to the spirit of this code.” “Section 187 contemplates amending a judgment by noticed motion. [Citations.] The court is not required to hold an evidentiary hearing on a motion to amend a judgment, but may rule on the motion based solely on declarations and other written evidence. [Citation.]” (Highland Springs Conference & Training Center v. City of Banning (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 267, 280.) “In the interests of justice, the ‘‘‘greatest liberality is to be encouraged’’’ in the allowance of amendments brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 187. [Citation.]” (Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Weinberg (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 1, 7.)

In addition, Code of Civil Procedure § 473(d), provides that a court may correct clerical judgments to conform to the judgment directed.

III. Discussion

Here, Plaintiff seeks to amend the Judgment entered in his favor and against Defendants to reflect $4,000.00 in damages, $5,715.00 in attorney’s fees, and $1,405.00 in costs. (Mot. p. 1.) Plaintiff argues that “[t]he motion is required because the original judgment entered on May 8, 2017 does not reflect the attorney fees and costs awarded to Plaintiff.” (Ibid.)

Plaintiff states that Judgment was entered on May 8, 2017 and Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees was granted on October 10, 2017. (Ibid. at p. 2; 10/10/17 Ruling re: Plaintiff’s Mot. for Attorneys Fees.) On April 28, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Memorandum of Costs, which “was never challenged, stricken, or taxed” and thus, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 685.090, the costs are part of the judgment. (Mot. p. 2; 4/28/17 Memorandum of Costs). Plaintiff has filed a Proposed Judgment with the instant Motion.

On November 29, 2022, Defendants filed an Opposition to the Motion. Defendants argue that the Motion is defective because it does not contain any declarations, evidence, or a copy of the original Judgment. (Oppos. p. 1.) Plaintiff does not provide any reason that the judgment should be amended more than five years after it was entered. (Ibid.) Plaintiff has not submitted any evidence that “(1) judgment was entered in plaintiff’s favor; (2) attorney fees in the sum of $5,715 were awarded to plaintiff; and (3) plaintiff filed a timely cost memorandum in the amount of $1,405, which was not ‘challenged, taxed or reduced.’” (Ibid. at p. 3.) Defendants also argue that the nature of the underlying action is unclear and “it is impossible to determine whether” Plaintiff is entitled to the attorney’s fees in the requested amount. (Ibid.) The Court finds Defendant’s arguments unavailing as the Order granting attorneys fees and the Memorandum of Costs are part of the record in this case.

The Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to $4,000.00 in damages, as judgment was entered on May 8, 2017. (5-8-17 Judgment.) The Court also granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees in the amount of $5,715.00 on October 10, 2017. (10-10-17 Minute Order.)

Moreover, Plaintiff filed a Memorandum of Costs on April 28, 2017. According to Code of Civil Procedure § 685.090(a), “[c]osts are added to and become a part of the judgment (1) [i]f a memorandum of costs is filed pursuant to Section 685.070 and no motion to tax is made, upon the expiration of the time for making the motion.” Section 685.070(c) sets out that the judgment debtor may file a noticed motion to tax the costs within 10 days after being served with the memorandum of costs and if no motion is filed, “[t]he court shall make an order allowing or disallowing the costs to the extent justified under the circumstances of the case.” Here, the Memorandum of Costs was served on April 24, 2017, and Defendants did not file a motion to strike or tax costs. (4-28-17 Memorandum, p. 2.)

The Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to the amount of attorney’s fees and costs requested. Furthermore, the Court has the authority to amend the judgment to include the attorney’s fees and costs.

For these reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Judgment is GRANTED, and Judgment is amended to include damages of $4,000.00, attorney’s fees of $5,715.0, and costs of $1,405.00.

IV. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons,

Moving party is ordered to give notice.