Case Number: BC666093 Hearing Date: December 10, 2019 Dept: 4A

Motion to Tax Costs

Having considered the moving and opposing papers, the Court rules as follows. No reply papers were filed.

BACKGROUND

On June 26, 2017, Plaintiff Jessica Fierro (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. alleging premises liability and negligence for a slip-and-fall that occurred on July 31, 2015.

On August 5, 2019, Plaintiff filed an amendment to her complaint renaming Doe 1 as Defendant Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles.

On September 16, 2019, Plaintiff filed an amendment to her complaint renaming Doe 2 as Defendant Broadway Main Associates, LLC.

On September 25, 2019, the Court entered summary judgement in Defendant Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. favor and against Plaintiff.

On October 10, 2019, Defendant Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. filed a memorandum of costs.

On October 29, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion to strike and/or tax costs.

Trial is set for May 26, 2019.

PARTY’S REQUEST

Plaintiff asks the Court for an order striking or taxing Defendant Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.’s (“Opposing Defendant”) request for attorney’s fees because attorney’s fees are not permitted here.

LEGAL STANDARD

“A prevailing party who claims costs must serve and file a memorandum of costs within 15 days after the date of service of the notice of entry of judgment or dismissal by the clerk under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.5 or the date of service of written notice of entry of dismissal, or within 180 days after entry of judgment, whichever is first.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1700, subd. (a)(1).)

“Any notice of motion to strike or to tax costs must be served and filed 15 days after service of the costs memorandum. If the cost memorandum was served by mail, the period is extended as provided in Code of Civil Procedure section 1013.” (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1700, subd. (b)(1).)

“Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding. This means that the prevailing party is entitled to all of his costs unless another statute provides otherwise. Absent such statutory authority, the court has no discretion to deny costs to the prevailing party.” (Nelson v. Anderson (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 111, 128-129 (citations and internal quotations omitted); Code of Civ. Proc. § 1032, subd. (b) (“Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding”).)

Initial verification of a bill of costs is prima facie evidence of the reasonable necessity of the claimed costs, and there is no requirement that copies of bills, invoices, statements or other supporting documentation be attached to the bill of costs; however, if costs have been put in issue by a motion to tax costs, the burden shifts to the party claiming costs to establish reasonableness. (Jones v. Dumrichob, (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 1258, 1267.)

DISCUSSION

Attorney’s fees are allowable when based on contract, statute, or law. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1033.5, subd. (a)(10).) Plaintiff argues Opposing Defendant’s request for attorney’s fees is not allowable because there was no contract between Plaintiff and Opposing Defendant nor any statute or law that authorizes attorney’s fees. (Motion, pp. 4:3-5:13.) Opposing Defendant does not object to Plaintiff’s request to strike attorney’s fees. (Opposition, p. 2:26-2:27.)

The Court agrees with Plaintiff. The Court granted summary judgment in Opposing Defendant’s favor on September 25, 2019 because Opposing Defendant demonstrated it did not own, possess, or control the premises Plaintiff allegedly slipped and fell on. There is no contractual dispute between these parties. The Court is unaware of any statute or law that would entitle Opposing Defendant to attorney’s fees in this context.

The motion is GRANTED.

The Court strikes item number 10 for $3,812.50 in attorney’s fees from Opposing Defendant’s memorandum of costs filed on October 10, 2019:

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.