Fourth District, Division 2 Acknowledges General Rule on Appeal.
Code of Civil Procedure section 1268.720 sets out a general rule that a defendant landowner is entitled to his costs on appeal, a rule not restricted to the situation of whether or not he prevails. The purpose of the rule is to ensure that the landowner receives a net sum at the conclusion of eminent domain proceedings that represents just compensation for the property. (Los Angeles Unified School Dist. v. Wilshire Center Marketplace, 89 Cal.App.4th 1413, 1419 (2001).) Departures from this rule should be rare, the courts have held. (City of Los Angeles v. Ricards, 10 Cal.3d 385, 390 (1973).)
In People ex rel. Dept. of Transportation v. Constant, Case Nos. E044802, E045320 & E046012 (4th Dist., Div. 2 May 13, 2009) (unpublished), a trial court refused to award defendant landowner—who did obtain a successful verdict after losing some interim appellate writ petitions—costs totaling $10,032.47 requested under sections 1268.710 and 1268.720 as well as Revenue and Taxation Code section 50811. The trial court taxed these costs based on the State’s argument that landowner was not entitled to any “litigation expenses” under section 1250.410.
On appeal by landowner, the Fourth District, Division 1 reversed for a simple reason: landowner was not claiming costs under section 1250.410, but under sections 1268.710 and 1268.720—with section 1268.710 codifying the principle that the property owner must be reimbursed for costs allowable under section 1033.5. No basis for departure had been established by the State, so that the matter was remanded to the lower court for redetermination of the appropriate costs under sections 1268.710 and 1268.720.
Comments