Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 18STCV06789, Date: 2024-05-09 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 18STCV06789, Date: 2024-05-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 18STCV06789 Hearing Date: May 9, 2024 Dept: C

RILEY v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

CASE NO.: 18STCV06789

HEARING: 05/09/24

Defendant COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES’ Motion to Tax is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.

Moving Party to give Notice.

This action was filed on November 30, 2018. Plaintiff was awarded costs on appeal. Plaintiff filed a Memorandum of Costs on December 13, 2023.

Defendant now moves to tax three items of costs and seeks an extension to file the instant Motion. This Motion was filed on January 31, 2024.

In Opposition, Plaintiff argues that the Motion is untimely and that Plaintiff’s costs were all reasonably incurred.

Pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1700(b)(1), any notice of motion to strike or tax costs must be served and filed 15 days after service of the cost memorandum. However, the Court may extend the times for serving and filing the notice of motion to strike or tax costs for a period not to exceed 30 days. (CRC Rule 3.1700(b)(2).) The Court has discretion under CCP §473 to grant relief for inadvertence of excusable neglect to consider untimely motions to tax costs. (Doughs v. Williams (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 287, 290.)

Defendant’s request for an extension to file the instant Motion is GRANTED. Defendant asserts that the failure to timely file was due to excusable neglect where Counsel for Defendant was not aware that a Memorandum of Costs had been filed until the morning of January 16, 2024. (Chung Decl., ¶2.) The Court will rule on the merits.

The Motion to Tax is DENIED as to Cost Item Number 1. Plaintiff incurred $907 as a filing fee for the Notice of Appeal, which includes charges from First Legal for filing the Notice of Appeal, the service for advancing and posting the appeal fee, and the charge for filing the Notice Designating the Record of Appeal. These costs are reasonable and allowed per Code.

The Motion to Tax is GRANTED as to Cost Item Number 4 in the amount of $720.70. Briefs were electronically filed and served. Electronic copies of all briefs were available. These costs for the printing and copying of briefs are unreasonable.

The Motion to Tax is DENIED as to Cost Item Number 6. Plaintiff incurred $212.06 in transmitting, filing, and service of record, briefs, and other papers. These costs are reasonable and allowed per Code.