Costs: $27,000 In Third Party Litigation Company Filing Expenses, Deposition Transcripts/Videos, Trial Binders, And Deposition Travel Expenses Were Properly Awarded

Losing Plaintiff Could Not Overcome Abuse Of Discretion Standard.

            Code of Civil Procedure sections 1032, 1033, and 1033.5 are the main statutory provisions which govern the award of “routine” costs to a prevailing party in California state court litigation.  This is the way it works for the prevailing party:  there are specific categories of costs which are recoverable and not recoverable; if nothing is listed or banned, then the particular costs item, if reasonable in nature, is a discretionary one for the trial court to grant or deny depending on whether it was “reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation” rather than merely convenient or beneficial to litigation preparation.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5(c)(2)-(4).)  A properly filled-out costs memorandum is prima facie evidence that the expenses were necessarily incurred, with the party moving to tax costs having the burden to show the costs were unreasonable or unnecessary.  A trial judge’s decision on awarding costs is generally reviewed for abuse of discretion.

            The Fifth District in Klein v. Munger, Case No. F077605 (5^th Dist. Nov. 10, 2020) (unpublished) applied these principles to a situation where a plaintiff lost an arbitration and unsuccessfully attempted to vacate the arbitration award, resulting in a postjudgment award of routine costs of about $27,000 to prevailing defendants.  Plaintiff, on appeal, challenged certain items of awarded costs, but could not surmount the deferential abuse of discretion standard such that the costs order was affirmed.

            Using a third-party litigation company to assist in filing documents was a discretionary cost request properly awarded.  Deposition transcripts/videos are a listed costs item, useful given the arbitrator indicated that the depositions and videotaped excerpts were important in adjudicating the matter.  Trial binder costs (with the binders containing arbitration exhibits) were recoverable in light of them being used in the arbitration.  (Chaban v. Wet Seal, Inc., 203 Cal.App.4^th 49, 59 (2012).). Finally, deposition travel expenses are allowable and were reasonable here given some distance that the deposing attorneys had to travel.