Plaintiffs Paula Thomas and PDTW, LLC'S Motion to Tax Cuts Regarding the Memorandum of Costs Filed by Kring and Chung Plaintiffs PDTW, LLC, Thomas Wylde Holdings, LLC, and Paula Thomas’s motion to tax costs is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. As a result, the Court awards a total of $7,245.65 in costs to Defendants Kring & Chung LLP, Kenneth Chung, Allyson Thompson, Laura Booth and Laura Hess. I.
Standard of Review A prevailing party is allowed to recover its costs under CCP § 1032. There is no dispute that Defendants, whose demurrer was sustained without leave to amend, are the prevailing party in this matter. Recoverable costs are set forth in CCP § 1033.5, which defines allowable, non-allowable and discretionary costs. (Id., § 1033.5(a), (b), (c)(4).) Allowable and discretionary costs may be recovered only if “reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation.” (Id., § 1033.5(c); see also Ladas v. California State
Hearing Date
September 18, 2020
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Plaintiffs Paula Thomas and PDTW, LLC'S Motion to Tax Cuts Regarding the Memorandum of Costs Filed by Kring and Chung Plaintiffs PDTW, LLC, Thomas Wylde Holdings, LLC, and Paula Thomas’s motion to tax costs is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. As a result, the Court awards a total of $7,245.65 in costs to Defendants Kring & Chung LLP, Kenneth Chung, Allyson Thompson, Laura Booth and Laura Hess. I.
Standard of Review A prevailing party is allowed to recover its costs under CCP § 1032. There is no dispute that Defendants, whose demurrer was sustained without leave to amend, are the prevailing party in this matter. Recoverable costs are set forth in CCP § 1033.5, which defines allowable, non-allowable and discretionary costs. (Id., § 1033.5(a), (b), (c)(4).) Allowable and discretionary costs may be recovered only if “reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation.” (Id., § 1033.5(c); see also Ladas v. California State