Segal v. Asics Am. Corp., No. S263569 (Cal. Jan. 13, 2022)
The costs statute—Code of Civil Procedure § 1033.5—generally permits a prevailing party to recover as a cost trial graphics expenses, to the extent “they were reasonably helpful to aid the trier of fact.” § 1033.5(a)(13). Those costs also can arguably be recovered under § 1033.5(c)(4), which gives the trial court discretion to award costs that are reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation.” The question in this case is whether expenses incurred for presentations that were never used are recoverable. Decisions of the Court of Appeal are all over the map on that issue, so the Supreme Court granted review to resolve the question.
The § 1033.5(a)(13) question is pretty easy. Absent some kind of jural telepathy, it is not logically possible that trial graphics that have not been used were helpful to the trial of fact. The Court runs all the traps on this—statutory interpretation, legislative history, etc.—and lands on the obvious point.
The availability of a discretionary award under § 1033.5(c)(4) is a little closer. But, looking to the structure of the statute, the Court explains that subdivision (a) describes costs the court must award, and subdivision (b) describes costs the court must not award, and everything else is subject to the court’s discretion under subdivision (c). Although the non-prevailing Plaintiff argues that this creates an incentive to run up costs, the Court notes, specifically, that an award under (c) requires the trial court to find both that the expenses were both necessary and reasonable.
Affirmed.
No comments:
Post a Comment