Motion to Strike or Tax Costs – GRANTED IN PART
Defendant Hyundai Motor America’s Motion to Tax Plaintiff Matan Grunfeld’s costs is granted in part. The Court taxes $337.50 in costs. The remainder of the costs sought, in the amount of $888.62, is awarded to Plaintiff.
The right to recover costs of suit is determined entirely by statute. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032 et seq. Unless otherwise expressly prohibited by statute, a prevailing party is entitled to recover costs as a matter of right. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032(b).
Specific to Beverly-Song cases, Civil Code §1794(d) states: “If the buyer prevails in an action under this section, the buyer shall be allowed by the court to recover as part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses, including attorney's fees based on actual time expended, determined by the court to have been reasonably incurred by the buyer in connection with the commencement and prosecution of such action.”
Plaintiff accepted Defendant’s CCP Se
Hearing Date
September 21, 2020
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Motion to Strike or Tax Costs – GRANTED IN PART
Defendant Hyundai Motor America’s Motion to Tax Plaintiff Matan Grunfeld’s costs is granted in part. The Court taxes $337.50 in costs. The remainder of the costs sought, in the amount of $888.62, is awarded to Plaintiff.
The right to recover costs of suit is determined entirely by statute. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032 et seq. Unless otherwise expressly prohibited by statute, a prevailing party is entitled to recover costs as a matter of right. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032(b).
Specific to Beverly-Song cases, Civil Code §1794(d) states: “If the buyer prevails in an action under this section, the buyer shall be allowed by the court to recover as part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses, including attorney's fees based on actual time expended, determined by the court to have been reasonably incurred by the buyer in connection with the commencement and prosecution of such action.”
Plaintiff accepted Defendant’s CCP Se