Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 20STLC05764, Date: 2022-07-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STLC05764    Hearing Date: July 27, 2022    Dept: 26

MOTION TO STRIKE OR TAX MEMO OF COSTS

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Brian Whitaker’s Motion to Strike, or alternatively, to Tax Costs is DENIED.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff Brian Whitaker (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (“the Unruh Act”) against Defendants Larchmont Village Investors, LP, Tho-Sey, Inc. and Sisato, Inc. (“Defendants”) on July 10, 2020.

On June 21, 2021, the Court granted Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the alternative, Summary Adjudication. (Minute Order, 06/21/21.) Pursuant to that order, judgment was entered in Defendants’ favor on June 22, 2021. Plaintiff filed an appeal of the judgment on July 22, 2021, which remains pending. Defendants filed a Memorandum of Costs on July 23, 2021.

On December 15, 2021, the Court granted Defendants’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees. (Minute Order, 12/15/21.) An Amended Judgment was issued on December 21, 2021.

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Strike, or alternatively, to Tax Costs on January 7, 2022. Defendants filed an opposition on March 28, 2022. The Motion initially came for hearing on April 27, 2022, at which time the Court noted that although the Notice of Motion had been filed, no supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities had been filed. (Minute Order, 04/27/22.) The Court continued the hearing to allow Plaintiff an opportunity to file the Memorandum of Points and Authorities by July 1, 2022. (Ibid.)

On July 12, 2022, the Appellate Division issued a remittitur affirming the June 21, 2021 order granting summary judgment in Defendant’s favor. (Remittitur, filed 07/12/22.)

To date, no Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of the Motion to Strike or Tax Costs has been filed.

Discussion

As noted previously, Plaintiff’s Motion is not accompanied by a memorandum of points and authorities. Although the Motion indicates that a memorandum of points and authorities was served on Defendants, no such documents is on file with the Court. “The memorandum must contain a statement of facts, a concise statement of the law, evidence and arguments relied on, and a discussion of the statutes, cases, and textbooks cited in support of the position advanced.” (CRC Rule 3.1113(b).) Furthermore, Plaintiff’s failure to provide a memorandum as required by the Rule is an “admission that the [request] is without merit and cause for its denial.” (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1113, subds. (a), (b); In re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 964, 976.)

Therefore, Plaintiff Brian Whitaker’s Motion to Strike, or alternatively, to Tax Costs is DENIED.

Court clerk to give notice.