Costs: Teacher Losing Administrative Mandamus Proceeding Was Liable For $3,951.74 In Routine Costs

His Claim Of Indigency Was An Immaterial Consideration.

               In Kissner v. Loma Prieta Joint Union School Dist., Case No. H050873 et al. (6^th Dist. Mar. 15, 2024) (unpublished), petitioner teacher challenged his layoff under the Education Code, but he lost before an ALJ and later lost an administrative mandamus writ proceeding before the superior court.  The lower court ordered him to pay District’s routine costs of $3,951.74, consisting mainly of District’s preparation of the ALJ transcripts after teacher requested an indigency fee waiver. 

               On appeal, teacher argued that, as an in pro per litigant, he was excused from paying costs, an argument rejected by both the trial and appellate courts.  The Sixth District first noted the general rule:  courts have no discretion to deny costs based on the losing party’s lack of resources. (See Nelson v. Anderson (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 111, 129 [concluding that there is no “discretion to consider a party’s ability to pay” under section 1032 of the Code of Civil Procedure]; see also Alfaro v. Colgate- Palmolive (LAUD Asbestos Cases) (2018) 25 Cal.App.5th 1116, 1124-1125 [finding “no authority . . . for the court to analyze whether costs are reasonable based on the losing party’s ability to pay” under section 1033.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure].)  Teacher argued the result was different under CCP § 1094.5 in mandamus writ proceedings, but the reviewing court dispatched that contention by observing that record preparation was taxable by the prevailing party, not just a prevailing petitioner, such that the Legislature created no “indigency exception” under section 1094.5.