Melnyk v. Robledo
64 Cal.App.3d 618 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976) Cited 157 timesNoting that "the trial court . . . is not bound by the itemization claimed in the attorney's affidavit"
Sanabria v. Embrey
92 Cal.App.4th 422 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001) Cited 52 timesReversing trial courts award of costs where memorandum was untimely filed and the party seeking costs made no claim of mistake or inadvertence
Hydratec v. Sun Valley 260 Orchard Vineyard Co.
223 Cal.App.3d 924 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990) Cited 48 timesIn Hydratec, the court was faced with a costs and fee dispute following three separate cases that had been consolidated, at a minimum, for the purposes of trial.
Vons Cos., Inc. v. Lyle Parks, Jr., Inc.
177 Cal.App.4th 823 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 19 times 1 Legal AnalysesNo. B208335. August 17, 2009. Appeal from the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. BC352507, William F. Fahey, Judge. Ropers, Majeski, Kohn Bentley, James A. Lassart, Adrian G. Driscoll and Suzanne E. Rischman for Plaintiff and Appellant. Lorber, Greenfield Polito, Bruce W. Lorber, Steven M. Polito and David B. Roper for Defendant and Respondent. OPINION BENDIX, J.[fn*] [fn*] Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California
Hadley v. Krepel
167 Cal.App.3d 677 (Cal. Ct. App. 1985) Cited 49 timesIn Hadley, the trial court ordered a significantly reduced amount of contractual attorney fees and costs to the prevailing defendant upon hearing the plaintiff's motion to tax costs; it reduced the fees even lower than the plaintiff requested in the motion.
Applegate v. St. Francis Lutheran Church
23 Cal.App.4th 361 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994) Cited 30 times 1 Legal AnalysesLooking to section 1033.5, subdivision (c) as an alternative basis to allow exhibit-related costs not authorized by section 1033.5, subdivision
Sequoia Vacuum Systems v. Stransky
229 Cal.App.2d 281 (Cal. Ct. App. 1964) Cited 40 timesHolding that a fiduciary duty existed where the defendant was a "managerial employee and director of the . . . corporation"
Hogan v. Ingold
38 Cal.2d 802 (Cal. 1952) Cited 50 timesIn Hogan v. Ingold (1952) 38 Cal.2d 802 [ 243 P.2d 1], the court discussed the rights of a shareholder who complained that limitations placed on her ability to bring a derivative suit deprived her of a valuable property right.
Simms v. County of Los Angeles
35 Cal.2d 303 (Cal. 1950) Cited 53 timesHolding bank vault doors and counterlines were properly classified as fixtures, and like property of other businesses, such as jewelers, also should have been classified as fixtures; however, bank failed to show resulting economic disparity and therefore failed to establish equal protection claim under the federal Constitution or former article 1, section 11 (now Cal. Const., art. IV, § 16), of the state Constitution requiring “uniform operation” of all general laws
City of Downey v. Gonzales
262 Cal.App.2d 563 (Cal. Ct. App. 1968) Cited 2 timesDocket No. 31295. May 28, 1968. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County granting a motion to retax costs after judgment in an action in eminent domain. James D. Tante, Judge. Reversed with directions. Phill Silver and Manuel Ruiz for Defendants and Appellants. Royal M. Sorensen, City Attorney, Burke, Williams Sorensen and Carl K. Newton for Plaintiff and Respondent. STEPHENS, J. This appeal arises from an order for costs after judgments in an action in eminent domain brought
Rule 3.1700 - Prejudgment costs
Cal. R. 3.1700 Cited 278 times(a) Claiming costs (1)Trial costs 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 judgment or dismissal, or within 180 days after entry of judgment, whichever is first. The memorandum of costs must be verified by a statement of the party, attorney, or agent that to the best