Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 20STCV21366, Date: 2023-08-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV21366    Hearing Date: August 7, 2023    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: August 7, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice Leiter

(2) Motions to Tax Costs

T/R:      THE PARTIES’ MOTIONS TO TAX COSTS ARE GRANTED.

PLAINTIFF TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at SMCdept54@lacourt.org with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

The Court considers the moving papers, oppositions, and replies.

Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, “a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding.”  (CCP § 1032(b).)  “Allowable costs shall be reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation.”  (CCP § 1033.5(c)(2).)  “If the items appearing in a cost bill appear to be proper charges, the burden is on the party seeking to tax costs to show that they were not reasonable or necessary.”  (Ladas v. California State Auto. Assn. (1993) 19 Cal. App. 4th 761, 774.)  “On the other hand, if the items are properly objected to, they are put in issue and the burden of proof is on the party claiming them as costs.”  (Ibid.)

Both Plaintiffs and Defendants move to tax the others’ memoranda of costs. Plaintiffs and Defendants both argue that they alone are the prevailing parties and the others are not. CCP § 1032(a)(4) provides, “ ‘Prevailing party’ includes the party with a net monetary recovery, a defendant in whose favor a dismissal is entered, a defendant where neither plaintiff nor defendant obtains any relief, and a defendant as against those plaintiffs who do not recover any relief against that defendant. If any party recovers other than monetary relief and in situations other than as specified, the prevailing party shall be as determined by the court, and under those circumstances, the court, in its discretion, may allow costs or not and, if allowed, may apportion costs between the parties on the same or adverse sides pursuant to rules adopted under Section 1034.”

The Court’s judgment stated:

1. As to both Plaintiffs, Judgment was entered in favor of defendant Warren A. Stanley;

2. As to Plaintiff Youth Justice Coalition only, Judgment was entered in favor of Defendant State of California;

3. On Plaintiff Robert Mann’s first cause of action (Unreasonable Seizures/Impoundments), Judgment was entered in favor of defendant State of California;

4. On Plaintiff Robert Mann’s second cause of action (Denial of Due Process), Judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff Robert Mann in part as follows: the failure to inform owners of vehicles impounded under Cal. Veh. Code § 14602.6 that their vehicles are subject to immediate release pursuant to the CHP Management Memo issued November 19, 2021, and to consider vehicle owner’s present ability to pay towing and storage charges, violates the due process rights of vehicle owners.

5. On Plaintiff Robert Mann’s second of action, the Court issued a permanent injunction as follows: A. The CHP was commanded to revise the CHP 180 form to advise vehicle owners of the procedures for vehicle returns set forth in the November 19, 2021 policy memorandum for vehicles impounded under Cal. Veh. Code § 14602.6; B. CHP officers shall consider the present ability to pay towing, storage, and any other fees in vehicle storage hearings under Cal. Veh. Code § 22852 and in vehicle returns pursuant to the November 2021 policy memorandum.

Both parties were partially successful and partially unsuccessful. Plaintiff Mann achieved some of his litigation goals but not all; judgment was entered against Plaintiff YJC on all its causes of action; judgment was entered in favor of Defendant Warren Stanley on all Plaintiffs’ causes of action; judgment was entered against Defendant CHP on Mann’s second cause of action.

As both parties “prevailed” in part, the Court declines to award costs to either party. There is no clear, singular winner. In its discretion under CCP § 1032(a)(4), the Court orders each party to bear their own costs. The motions to tax costs are GRANTED.