Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: BS174454, Date: 2023-05-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BS174454    Hearing Date: May 5, 2023    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTIES:             Plaintiffs Lisa Karlan, Cory Mac A’Ghobhainn, and Amy Jean Davis

RESPONDING PARTIES:    Defendants Hebrew Discovery Center and Netanel Louie

Motion to Tax Costs

The court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers filed in connection with this motion.

DISCUSSION

On September 26, 2022, defendants Hebrew Discovery Center and Netanel Louie (“Defendants”) filed their Memorandum of Costs with the court, requesting $2,009.37 in costs.

Plaintiffs Lisa Karlan, Cory Mac A’Ghobhainn, and Amy Jean Davis (“Plaintiffs”) move the court for an order taxing the costs requested in Defendants’ Memorandum of Costs.  Initially, Plaintiffs requested the court tax all claimed costs in the amount of $2,009.37.  In reply, Plaintiffs request the court tax $475.74 in costs, consisting of (1) various credit card fees incurred when filing motions, (2) fees incurred when filing separate proofs of service, (3) fees incurred by filing duplicate documents, and (4) eservice charges.  (Reply, p. 2:3-10.)

“A ‘verified memorandum of costs is prima facie evidence of the propriety’ of the items listed on it, and the burden is on the party challenging these costs to demonstrate that they were not reasonable or necessary.”  (Adams v. Ford Motor Co. (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 1475, 1486.)  “[T]he mere filing of a motion to tax costs may be a ‘proper objection’ to an item, the necessity of which appears doubtful, or which does not appear to be proper on its face.”  (Nelson v. Anderson (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 111, 131.)  However, if the items appear proper on their face, the burden is on the objecting party to show that the items are not “properly chargeable or [are] unreasonable….”  (Ibid.)

Defendants request, in their verified Memorandum of Costs, $2,009.37 in costs consisting of (1) $246.60 in filing and motion fees, and (2) $1,762.77 in electronic filing or service fees.  (MC-010, ¶¶ 1, 14; MC-010, p. 1 [verified by Stephanie Taub].)  The court finds that, in light of the number of documents filed by Defendants over the period of four years in this case, the amount of costs requested for filing and service fees do not appear, on their face, to be unreasonable or unnecessary.  Thus, Plaintiffs have the burden to demonstrate that these costs are not reasonable or necessary.  (Nelson, supra, 72 Cal.App.4th at p. 131.)

The court finds that Plaintiffs have not met their burden to show that the items requested in the Memorandum of Costs were not reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation.  Plaintiffs have not presented evidence showing that these costs were unnecessary or that the amounts incurred are unreasonable, and instead have only presented general arguments that Defendants failed to itemize or substantiate the costs.  This is insufficient to establish that the costs were unreasonable or unnecessary.  (Adams, supra, 199 Cal.App.4th at p. 1487 [“‘mere statements in the points and authorities accompanying its notice of motion to strike cost bill and the declaration of its counsel’ did not suffice to rebut the defendant’s prima facie showing that its . . . costs were reasonable and necessarily incurred”].)  

The court therefore denies Plaintiffs’ motion to tax costs.

ORDER

The court denies plaintiffs Lisa Karlan, Cory Mac A’Ghobhainn, and Amy Jean Davis’s motion to tax costs.

The court orders defendants Hebrew Discovery Center and Rabbi Netanel Louie to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  May 5, 2023

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court