What is a Motion to Tax Costs?

Useful Rulings on Motion to Tax Costs

Recent Rulings on Motion to Tax Costs

TRUE HARMONY INC ET AL VS ROSARIO PERRY ET AL

The pleading, petition, written notice of motion, or other similar paper that is the subject of Defendant’s motion, Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Costs, was withdrawn on February 7, 2020. Pursuant to Section 128.7(c)(1), the motion was filed but not served on January 24, 2020, allowing Plaintiff until February 14, 2020 to withdraw the contested Motion to Tax Costs. Having withdrawn the Motion to Tax Costs, pursuant to Section 128.7(c)(1), the instant motion should have never been filed.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

HUSSEIN V. RAZIN

Motion to Tax Costs The motion of the defendants to tax costs on appeal of prevailing party Ahmed D. Hussein is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Entire Cost Bill The defendants’ motion to strike the entire cost bill on the ground the costs claimed in the memorandum of costs are “patently improper” is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

CESAR COTTO VS JCDI INDUSTRIES LLC

.), plaintiff served a 998 which provided for judgment in the amount of $250,001 plus “costs under Code of Civil Procedure section 1032 and attorney’s fees allowed by law as determined by the court.” (Linton v. Co. of Contra Costa (2019) 31 Cal. App. 5th 628, 631; emphasis added.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

STALWORK V. WATSON

The Watsons now file a Motion to Tax Costs pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1700(b), to exclude certain non-allowable costs in Stalwork’s cost bill. Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5(a) sets forth allowable costs and subsection (b) sets forth costs that are not allowable, except where expressly authorized by law. Allowable costs shall be reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation and shall be reasonable in amount.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

WILSON VS. WELLS FARGO

HEARING ON MOTION TO TAX COSTS OF DEFTS. WELLS FARGO & BERKADIA COMM. FILED BY DENAE WILSON, LONNIE WILSON * TENTATIVE RULING: * The court continues the hearing on this matter to July 15, 2020 at 9:00 a.m.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS VENICE SUITES LLC

Conclusion Based on the foregoing, the Court grants Plaintiff’s motion to tax costs in part. The Court taxes Defendants’ costs in the amount of $23.10. Defendants are ordered to give notice of this ruling DATED: July 1, 2020 ________________________________ Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

ALMA VANESSA CASILLAS ET AL VS WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS WFS LLC

Costs Because the agreement giving rise to plaintiffs’ entitlement to costs explicitly provides for “a motion requesting attorney’s fees and costs in connection with this action,” the court rejects any contention that costs must be dealt with by a separate motion to tax costs. A verified memorandum of costs is prima facie evidence that the costs, expenses, and services therein were necessarily incurred. (Seever v. Copley Press, Inc. (2006) 141 Cal.App.4th 1550, 1557.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

HIRAM ASH VS ANNEDORE PICK ET AL

.: BC499614 Hearing Date: July 1, 2020 Plaintiff’s motion to tax costs is DENIED. On January 22, 2013, Plaintiff Hiram Ash (Plaintiff) filed suit against Annedore Pick aka Anne Pick and Harold Pick (Defendants). On March 5, 2014, Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint (SAC) alleging general negligence. On August 23, 2016, a jury trial was held. The jury found in Defendant’s favor. On February 2, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY VS 38700 10TH STREET EAST, LLC, ET AL.

That statute provides that attorney fees authorized by contract, statute, or law are allowable as costs to the prevailing party under CCP section 1032. (CCP § 1033.5(a)(10).) “Any ‘suit’ against an insured we defend” obligates the insurer to pay a costs award only if the insurer had a duty to defend the insured. (Mintarsih, supra, 175 Cal.App.4th at 285.) An insurer’s duty to defend extends to all claims at least potentially covered under the policy. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

SINGH FAMILY TRUST VS D.P.A. INVESTORS, LLC

The court also notes Defendants did not file a motion to tax costs. Based on the foregoing, Defendants are ordered, jointly and severally, to pay Plaintiffs’ counsel for $522.67 in costs.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ABEL CONTRERAS ET AL VS PACER CARTAGE INC ET AL

Escobar, who is now in pro per, has not filed a Motion to Tax Costs. Nonetheless, despite the fact that there is no Motion to Tax Costs, the Court is required to award only “reasonable” costs. (CCP §1033.5(c)(2).) The request for $152,327.76 in costs against a single pro-per plaintiff, whose court trial lasted two days, is not reasonable.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

MOTION TO TAX COSTS (CCP § 685.040) TENTATIVE RULING: Judgment Debtor Corey Dye’s Motion to Tax Costs is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MARLAINA FIGUEROA ET AL VS JUAN J PADILLA-LOZA ET AL

In their Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Costs, defendants acknowledge that they are not seeking the costs for Dr. Harounian’s services before the date of the 998. [See, Opposition at 2.] Since the plaintiff received a net recovery against the defendants, she is the prevailing party. Accordingly, the Court will tax a total of $9,770 from defendants’ claimed costs. The Court orders the Clerk to amend the judgment to award defendants costs in the amount of $16,798.10.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

THEODORE CHARLES RILEY, ET AL. VS 9012 WEHO, LLC, ET AL.

Motion to Tax Costs The Court intends to grant the motion to vacate dismissal. The Court therefore would find the motion to tax costs MOOT in light of the above ruling. Moving party is ordered to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

KAI HOU LIANG VS JI LI

SUBJECT: (1) Motion to Tax Costs Moving Party: Ji Li Resp. Party: BCP, Inc. SUBJECT: (2) Motion to Tax Costs Moving Party: Ji Li Resp. Party: None Ji Li’s motion to tax costs of BCP, Inc. is GRANTED in part. The Court taxes requested costs of $360.00, and awards costs of $15,507.00. Ji Li’s motion to tax costs of Kai Hou Liang is GRANTED. The Court reduces the amount of costs sought by Kai Hou Liang by $54,851.93, awarding costs of $0.00.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

KAI HOU LIANG VS JI LI

SUBJECT: (1) Motion to Tax Costs Moving Party: Ji Li Resp. Party: BCP, Inc. SUBJECT: (2) Motion to Tax Costs Moving Party: Ji Li Resp. Party: None as of 06/24/2020 TENTATIVE RULING: Ji Li’s motion to tax costs of BCP, Inc. is GRANTED in part. The Court taxes requested costs of $360.00, and awards costs of $15,507.00. Ji Li’s motion to tax costs of Kai Hou Liang is GRANTED. The Court reduces the amount of costs sought by Kai Hou Liang by $54,851.93.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MINGSHU JIANG VS LAURA ROBLEDO

The court grants Defendant’s Motion to Tax Costs, in part. The court finds that the amount of $14,894.27 shall be deducted from Plaintiff’s recovery of $11,730.86. The court finds, pursuant CCP §998(e), Judgment for Defendant in the amount of $3,163.41. Defendant shall prepare a Final Judgment on the special verdict within 10 days.

  • Hearing

    Jun 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY V. DURAN

Defendant is a prevailing party and entitled to costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1032. Plaintiff cites no authority indicating that section 1032 does not apply in courts of limited jurisdiction. Nevertheless, plaintiff claims costs are simply unavailable to defendant due to the effect of Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.

  • Hearing

    Jun 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JACK MURRAY ET AL VS FRANK LYONS ET AL

On January 3, 2017, the Honorable Judge Richard Rico entered default judgment in favor of Barbara Black against: Cross-Defendants Tarilynne Anderson, Hoyt Sport Fit, John Jay Brocklebank and Frank Lyons, joint and severally, for: (1) damages totaling $175,466.86, pursuant to California Business and Professions Code section 19525, subdivision (b)(1); and (2) costs totaling $11,970.73, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 1032(b).

  • Hearing

    Jun 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU, INC. VS KARMA WELLNESS, LLC, ET AL.

As Defendant has not filed a Motion to Tax Costs, costs are awarded in the amount requested of $1,148.95.

  • Hearing

    Jun 29, 2020

SNELL V. QUINN

Motion to Tax Costs Defendant Lance Quinn (“Defendant”) seeks an order taxing the cost bill filed by Plaintiff Robert Snell (“Plaintiff”). On 9/19/2019, Plaintiff filed his memorandum of costs in three parts. Defendant seeks an order taxing certain deposition costs set forth in part 1 and part 2 of Plaintiff’s memorandum of costs, service of process fees in part 2, and expert witness fees in part 3.

  • Hearing

    Jun 29, 2020

JOSEPH LEE GREEN VS. CITY OF STOCKTON, A PUBLIC ENTITY

TENTATIVE RULING: On its own motion, the Court is continuing Plaintiff's motion for attorney fees and costs and Defendant's motion to tax costs to July 7, 2020 at 9:00 A.M. in Dept. 10D. The Court is disappointed that Counsel did not meet and confer prior to Plaintiff's Counsel filing the motion as the Court had fully expected they would have.

  • Hearing

    Jun 29, 2020

OPTIONAL CAPITAL INC ET AL VS DAS CORPORATION ET AL

Defendant’s Motion to Tax Costs. The motion to tax costs is GRANTED IN PART. Costs are taxed $27,673.26. Plaintiff is awarded costs in the amount of $48,018.62. Plaintiff requests costs in the amount of $75,691.88.

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

YAIR BEN MOSHE VS. UZRAD LEW

Under CCP section 1032(b), “a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding.” Section 1033.5 (a) provides that an allowable cost under §1032 includes attorney’s fees, when authorized by contract, statute or law. CCP § 1033.5 (a)(10).

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

PELTON VS EMPIRE POLO CLUB

The Motion to Tax Costs is granted in part and denied in part. The Court finds that Expert Witness Fees should be taxed at $22,528.66 for withdrawn and/or unsubstantiated fees. The Court finds that all contested costs for deposition fees and trial exhibits are reasonable and should not be taxed. Accordingly, the Court reduces total costs from $116,787.92 to $94,259.26. FACTUAL / PROCEDURAL CONTEXT This is a premises liability/personal injury case.

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 126     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.