Costs: Although Employer Prevailed On Appeal, DCA Decides It Should Not Be Granted Costs On Appeal Based On Omissions And Legal Misstatements In Appellate Proceedings

Employer Had To Bear Appeal Costs Rather Than Obtaining An Award Of Them.

               In Nelson v. Golden Queen Mining Co., Case No. F086907 (5^th Dist. Jan. 7, 2025) (unpublished), employer won a reversal and remand of a decision denying a motion to compel an arbitration as against an employee.  However, the Court of Appeal held that all parties should bear their own costs on appeal.  Employer argued it was the prevailing party and was entitled to costs on appeal.  The Fifth District disagreed, because (1) employer’s appellate civil case information statement did not check a box indicating that CAA proceedings were entitled to calendar preference over other civil cases (Ramirez v. Golden Queen Mining, LLC, 102 Cal.App.5^th 821, 829 (2024)); and (2) employer misstated the law in two appellate extension of time requests by stating that the case was not entitled to priority.  The omission and misstatements allowed the appellate court to have employer bear costs on appeal despite being a prevailing appellant under CRC, rule 8.278(a)(2).