Employment: 2/2 DCA Decides That Routine Costs To Prevailing Party Employer Parties Are Recoverable Under PAGA

It Found No Language Precluding The Result, Disagreeing With Cruz On This Issue.

            Unpublished decisions can be very instructive.  A recent one, Knowles v. Longwood Mgt. Corp., Case No. B314165 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 2 Jan. 3, 2024) (unpublished), is very instructive—prevailing PAGA defendants may be able to get routine costs under CCP § 1032, even if this case is not citable.  (Might be in the future!)

            Certain alleged employers prevailed in a PAGA case.  They moved for routine costs of $23,627.08 against losing employees, a request denied by the lower court.  The Second District reversed in an unpublished decision.

            The appellate court decided that it could not discern any “PAGA exception” to awarding prevailing party routine costs to an employer under section 1032 because employers were not precluded from obtaining routine costs. (See Lab. Code, § 2699(g)(1).) It expressly disagreed with any conclusions differently reached in Cruz v. Buffett, Inc., 57 Cal.App.5^th 221 (2020) because it did not expressly involve PAGA provisions.  Watch for developments on this one!