What is a Motion to Tax Costs?

Useful Rulings on Motion to Tax Costs

Recent Rulings on Motion to Tax Costs

JEFFREY NATHAN PURVEY VS YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF BURBANK, CALIFORNIA

Therefore, the Court denies the motion to tax costs. CONCLUSION AND ORDER Plaintiff’s motion to tax costs is denied. Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court. DATED: December 2, 2020 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court

  • Hearing

CALIFORNIA DUI LAWYERS ASSN ET AL VS CALIFORNIA DEPT OF MOTO

The Current Motion Defendants filed a motion to strike or tax costs (the “Motion”) and assert that: (1) the memorandum of costs is untimely and should be stricken in its entirety; and (2) if the Court declines to strike Plaintiffs’ memorandum of costs in its entirety, the Court should tax specific items therein because they are unnecessary or unreasonable.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

STARA ORIEN VS MISTA L LUTZ ET AL

The stipulation provided that “[t]he parties having reached a settlement of their differences and having executed a settlement agreement resolving all issues as between them in the above-entitled action,” took off calendar the motions to tax costs and for attorney’s fees and granted the motion for distribution of proceeds of the partition sale. (3/25/20 Stipulation 1:2-4.) Code Civ.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

JENNIFER LITTLE VS JONATHAN LOPEZ ET AL

Motion to Tax Costs Having considered the moving and opposing papers, the Court rules as follows. BACKGROUND On September 19, 2018, Plaintiff Shanna Rucker (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Raul Lopez, Adriana Osoy, City of Los Angeles, Wincal, LLC (“Defendant”) and Does 1 through 50.

  • Hearing

GOLDEN RAIN FOUNDATION OF LAGUNA WOODS V. DICKINSON

1) Motion for Sanctions 2) Motion to Strike or Tax Costs (1)MOTION FOR SANCTIONS Before the Court is a Motion by Cross-Complainant Alan Dale Dickinson (“Dickinson” or “Cross-Complainant”) ) against Cross-Defendants Golden Rain Foundation of Laguna Woods, Village Management Services, Inc., Brian Gruner, Jennifer Murphy, Beth Perak, and Marcy Sheinwold (collectively, “Cross-Defendants”).

  • Hearing

MANN V. PUENTE

Based on the Stipulation and Order filed on 11-17-20 under ROA No. 688 and the court’s 11-17-20 Minute Order, Defendants’ (Jason Jeffery and Miguel Puente) Motion to Tax Costs (filed on 2-25-20 under ROA No. 615 and scheduled for hearing on 11-24-20) and Plaintiff’s (David Mann) Motion to Tax Costs (filed on 3-2-20 under ROA No. 619) are continued to 2-23-21 at 9:00 a.m. in Department C19.

  • Hearing

SHARON V. PORTER

. [¶] (2) A party may serve and file a motion in the superior court to strike or tax costs claimed under (1) in the manner required by rule 3.1700. [¶] (3) An award of costs is enforceable as a money judgment.”

  • Hearing

MATSUMOTO VS EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT

Nor has Plaintiff established that she was not properly served with Defendant’s Motion to Tax Costs for relief under CCP 473(d). The filing of the proof of service creates a rebuttable presumption that service was proper.

  • Hearing

LACY VS COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

Lacy and Jacquesha Lacy bring this motion to tax costs. Having obtained a defense verdict, Defendants County of San Diego, Sean Ochos and Don Wood are the prevailing parties, and entitled to an award of recoverable costs. CCP §1032. Defendants submitted a Memorandum of Costs, indicating a total of $23,571.00 in costs. There were no "court-ordered transcripts." Accordingly, defendants have withdrawn the $1,955.00 costs for "court-ordered transcripts."

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

SAFFIRE VS CONEJO VALLEY UNIFIED

Specific costs will be addressed in the Court's ruling on Plaintiff's pending motion to tax costs. Defendant to give notice of the Court's ruling. ANALYSIS On 10-17-19, Defendant sent Plaintiff a 998 Offer to Compromise ("§ 998 Offer") in the amount of $10,000. On that same day, Plaintiff rejected the § 998 Offer. At trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Defendant.

  • Hearing

SAFFIRE VS CONEJO VALLEY UNIFIED

ANALYSIS The losing party may dispute any or all of the items in the prevailing party's costs memorandum by a motion to strike or tax costs. CRC 3.1700(b). If the items on their face appear to be proper charges, the verified memorandum of costs is prima facie evidence of their propriety, and the burden is on the party seeking to tax costs to show they were not reasonable or necessary. (Ladas v. California State Auto. Ass'n. (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761, 774.)

  • Hearing

JILLIAN MICHAELS, ET AL., VS GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP, ET AL.,

For these reasons, the motion to tax costs is granted in part, and denied in part.

  • Hearing

IN THE MATTER OF GEORGE T MORRISON JR. REVOCABLE SURVIVORS TRUST

Paula Charron’s Motion to Tax Costs Originally Filed 08/01/19 – HEARING REQUIRED. Counsel to apprise of status of stipulation.

  • Hearing

VALERIE RAE CECHVALA VS. FCA US LLC

Lastly, Defendant asserts the amount of time spent on Plaintiffs' fee motion and opposition to Defendant's motion to tax costs is excessive. Based on the rates Defendant identified in its opposition, it appears Plaintiffs spent a total of 36.5 hours on these tasks, which the court agrees is excessive. The court reduces this time by 50%, to 18 hours.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ANPING ZENG VS LOS ANGELES FILM REGIONAL CENTER II LP ET AL

(Opp. to Tax Costs 3:18-20.) Furthermore, this Court previously noted that “Plaintiff has not submitted any invoices to support the amount of interpreter fees sought.” (9/14/20 Ruling p. 4.) Thus, further billable entries necessitated by counsel Florence’s defective request for costs shall be discounted from the total award of fees.

  • Hearing

MICHAEL CASTRO VS FOSS MARITIME COMPANY ET AL

Pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1700(b)(1), “[a]ny notice of motion to strike or tax costs must be served and filed 15 days after service of the cost memorandum.” “The failure to file a motion to tax costs constitutes a waiver of the right to object.” (Douglas v. Willis (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 287, 289.) “After the time has passed for a motion to strike or tax costs or for determination of that motion the clerk must immediately enter the costs on the judgment.” (CRC Rule 3.1700(b)(4).)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

KEMPTON VS CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION

Based on the foregoing, the motion to strike or tax costs is denied. Defendants' claimed costs are allowed in the total amount of $61,716.90.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ROBERT SCOTT SHTOFMAN VS JULIE C LIM ET AL

Accordingly the Court is inclined to vacate that portion of its October 22, 2020 order granting Cross-Complainants Lim and Lopez’s motion to tax costs as to $160,000 of attorney’s fees on appeal on procedural grounds (page 4, lines 14-23; and page 6, lines 8-13). The court is further inclined to recalendar Cross-Complainants Lim and Lopez’s motion to tax costs as to $160,000 of attorney’s fees on appeal for the continued hearing date of December 8, 2020 at 8:30 am.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

DERRICK MARTIN VS JANA OSMOLINSKI

Plaintiffs Derrick Martin and Laura Martin bring this motion to tax costs. Plaintiffs contend that Defendants Anthony John, DDS and Pinnacle Endodontics, Dental Practice of Anthony D. John, DDS, MS, are not entitled to costs because the parties had a settlement agreement for a waiver of costs/waiver of malicious prosecution claim in exchange for a dismissal with prejudice.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

ANPING ZENG VS LOS ANGELES FILM REGIONAL CENTER II LP ET AL

(Opp. to Tax Costs 3:18-20.) Furthermore, this Court previously noted that “Plaintiff has not submitted any invoices to support the amount of interpreter fees sought.” (9/14/20 Ruling p. 4.) Thus, further billable entries necessitated by counsel Florence’s defective request for costs shall be discounted from the total award of fees.

  • Hearing

ROSALIE SERRANO VS HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Defendant filed a motion to tax costs on November 4, 2020, which is set to be heard on December 17, 2020. As such, the Court will not award costs by way of this motion. Accordingly, the motion for attorney’s fees is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $14,145.00. The Court will reserve its ruling on costs for the December 17, 2020 hearing on Defendant’s motion to tax costs.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

PETRA JACKSON VS PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY, ET AL

Petra Jackson’s Motion to Tax Costs TENTATIVE RULING Petra Jackson’s Motion to Tax Costs is granted. “Any notice of motion to strike or to tax costs must be served and filed 15 days after service of the cost memorandum. If the cost memorandum was served by mail, the period is extended as provided in Code of Civil Procedure section 1013. If the cost memorandum was served electronically, the period is extended as provided in Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6(a)(4).” Cal.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

ALAN ALEXANDER IRIGOYEN ET AL VS EXEL INC ET AL

Conclusion Moving Defendants’ motion to tax costs is granted. Moving Defendants to give notice.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

JULIO MARTINEZ VS ELIGIO GONZALEZ, ET AL.

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES; MOTION TO TAX COSTS (Civ. Code § 52(a); Cal. Rules of Court Rule 3.1702) TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff Julio Martinez’s Motion for Attorney Fees is GRANTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $950.00. ANALYSIS: On August 28, 2018, Plaintiff Julio Martinez (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for discrimination on the basis of disability against Defendants Elgio Gonzalez and Isabel M. Gonzalez (“Defendants”).

  • Hearing

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ANA MEJIA VS HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA

“Any notice of motion to strike or to tax costs must be served and filed 15 days after service of the costs memorandum. If the cost memorandum was served by mail, the period is extended as provided in Code of Civil Procedure section 1013.” Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1700(b)(1). “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.

  • Hearing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 169     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.