He Advocates “Nudges” For Efficient Litigation Given That 40% Of I/C Judges’ Cases Involve Pro-Plaintiff Prevailing Party Statutes; He Also Advocates A Meet And Confer Requirement For Motions To Tax Costs.
In an interesting article by sitting Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Richard L. Fruin, Jr. in the January 8, 2019 edition of The Los Angeles Daily Journal, he did a statistical tally of law and motion matters in his courtroom between 2013-2018 as well as making some poignant observations about how prevailing party fee statutes can make a difference in pro-plaintiff cases given the distribution of business to Independent Calendar Judges. Here is a summary of his findings and observations:
- Volume of Fee and Tax Costs Motions – FEES: in 2014, he had 25 motions, in 2017, he had 11 motions, and in 2018, he had 20 motions; MOTION TO TAX COSTS: in 2014, he had 12 motions, in 2017, he had 11 motions, and in 2018, he had 19 motions.
- Distribution of IC Judges’ Business in Pro-Plaintiff Prevailing Party Cases – Judge Fruin estimates that 30-35% of IC Judges’ caseloads involve employment cases and another 10% are motor vehicle warranty matters (many involving the Song-Beverly Act), altogether around 40% overall concern fee shifting statutes which are pro-plaintiff in nature. Given this reality, he tells defense counsel at case management conferences that they need to minimize demurrers and discovery costs given the possibility of fee-shifting. His advice: “Counsel should recognize that any statute or contract that provides the prevailing party shall recovery reasonable fees is a ‘nudge’ to encourage efficient litigation.”
- Motions to Tax Costs Often Exceed the Amount at Issue; Meet and Confer Requirement Suggested – Judge Fruin granted in part most of his 19 motion to tax costs in 2018 because the prevailing party “overclaimed” entitlement to costs recovery. He observed that tax costs motions usually involved rather small monetary amounts, with the expenses to make and defend the costs often exceeding what was at issue. His suggestion: “The Legislature could impose a reasonable ‘nudge’ in the form of an in-person meet and confer as condition to bringing a motion to tax costs. Substantial savings in fees and time could be realized by doing this.”
- LASC Judge Getting More Research Help – In 2019, LASC will provide every IC judge with an assigned research attorney for law and motion matters, rather than the past one research attorney per two judge allocation.
Comments