This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/15/2020 at 06:36:03 (UTC).

RONG SUN ET AL VS CITY OF TORRANCE ET AL

Case Summary

On 09/26/2017 RONG SUN filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against CITY OF TORRANCE. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are MARC D. GROSS, JON R. TAKASUGI, HOLLY E. KENDIG and THOMAS D. LONG. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7211

  • Filing Date:

    09/26/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

MARC D. GROSS

JON R. TAKASUGI

HOLLY E. KENDIG

THOMAS D. LONG

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs, Petitioners and Appellants

WANGE JENNIFER

WANG JEFFREY

SUN RONG

WANG JASON

WANG JENNIFER

LAW OFFICES OF SOHAILA SAGHEB

Defendants, Respondents and Cross Plaintiffs

LOS ANGELES COUNTY OF

TORRANCE CITY OF

DOES 1 TO 25

ALEXANDER ZACHARY

CITY OF TORRANCE

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Cross Plaintiffs and Respondents

CITY OF TORRANCE A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

CITY OF TORRANCE

Defendant and Cross Defendant

ALEXANDER ZACHARY

Other

SAGHEB SOHAILA ESQ.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

ROSENBERG GEORGE M. ESQ.

SAGHEB SOHAILA ESQ.

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

DELLA THOMPSON-BELL

THOMPSON-BELL DELLA

AUSTIN MARK JASON

THOMPSON-BELL DELLA DIANA DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorney

THOMPSON-BELL DELLA DIANA DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY

 

Court Documents

Motion to Tax Costs

4/24/2020: Motion to Tax Costs

Notice of Filing of Notice of Appeal (Unlimited Civil) - NOTICE OF FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEAL (UNLIMITED CIVIL) NOA:12/10/19

12/12/2019: Notice of Filing of Notice of Appeal (Unlimited Civil) - NOTICE OF FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEAL (UNLIMITED CIVIL) NOA:12/10/19

Request for Dismissal

10/16/2019: Request for Dismissal

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER) OF 10/08/2019

10/8/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER) OF 10/08/2019

Objection - OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION

6/19/2019: Objection - OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION

Notice of Lodging - NOTICE OF LODGING VIDEO VERSION OF EXHIBIT "R"

6/19/2019: Notice of Lodging - NOTICE OF LODGING VIDEO VERSION OF EXHIBIT "R"

Declaration - DECLARATION COMPENDIUM OF EXHIBITS IN OPPOS TO MSJ, PART 2

6/6/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION COMPENDIUM OF EXHIBITS IN OPPOS TO MSJ, PART 2

Association of Attorney

2/22/2019: Association of Attorney

Motion for Summary Judgment

3/8/2019: Motion for Summary Judgment

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

3/8/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

3/8/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

Notice of Lodging - NOTICE OF LODGING NOTICE OF LODGING

3/8/2019: Notice of Lodging - NOTICE OF LODGING NOTICE OF LODGING

Proof of Service by Mail - PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL AMENDED

3/13/2019: Proof of Service by Mail - PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL AMENDED

Notice of Deposit - Jury

3/13/2019: Notice of Deposit - Jury

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - PROOF OF SERVICE (NOT SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT) AMENDED

3/25/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - PROOF OF SERVICE (NOT SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT) AMENDED

Minute Order -

8/31/2018: Minute Order -

NOTICE OF ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

4/24/2018: NOTICE OF ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES) -

5/25/2018: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES) -

83 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/26/2021
  • Hearing05/26/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/26/2021
  • Hearing05/26/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Tax Costs

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/26/2021
  • Hearing05/26/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Pending Outcome of Appeal

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Pending Outcome of Appeal) - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Tax Costs - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal; Order to Show Cause Re: Pe...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/25/2020
  • DocketAppeal Record Delivered; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2020
  • DocketAppeal - Notice Court Reporter to Prepare Appeal Transcript (;B302940, NOA 12/10/19;); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
126 More Docket Entries
  • 12/04/2017
  • DocketAPPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM CIVIL III EXPARTE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/04/2017
  • DocketApplication ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/04/2017
  • DocketApplication ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/19/2017
  • DocketNOTICE OF REJECTION - APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/26/2017
  • DocketAPPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/26/2017
  • DocketAPPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/26/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/26/2017
  • DocketApplication ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/26/2017
  • DocketApplication ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/26/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Rong Sun (Plaintiff); Jason Wang (Plaintiff); Jeffrey Wang (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC677211    Hearing Date: September 28, 2020    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

RONG SUN, ET AL.,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

CITY OF TORRANCE, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: BC677211

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO TAX COSTS

Dept. 31

8:30 a.m.

September 28, 2020

  1. Background Facts

    Plaintiffs, Rong Sun, Jason Wang, Jeffrey Wang, and Jennifer Wang filed this action against Defendants, City of Torrance and County of Los Angeles for damages arising out of an automobile accident that killed Decedent, Charles Wang.

    The Court heard Defendant the City of Torrance’s motion for summary judgment on 8/26/19, where it took the matter under submission. On 10/8/19, the City’s motion for summary judgment was granted. On 12/10/19, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal.

    Thereafter, on 4/14/20, the City filed its memorandum of costs. On 4/24/20, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion to tax costs in the sum of $2,433.58. Based on current conditions, including, but not limited to, the spread of COVID-19, the court set this matter to be heard on 9/28/20, and ordered the moving party, Plaintiffs, to give notice of the hearing date. (Min. Order 5/1/20.) As of 9/23/20, Plaintiffs have not filed any such notice with this court.

    The hearing on the motion is continued to ___{{TBD}}______________ at 8:30 a.m. in Department 31 of the Spring Street Courthouse. If this date is not an available date for Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs may use the online reservation system to change the hearing date to the next available convenient date in the system.

    Alternatively, if Plaintiffs can produce evidence that they properly gave notice of the subject hearing date as ordered, the court rules as follows:

  2. Motion to Tax Costs

  1. Initial Note

    As an initial matter, the court notes that upon filing of an appeal, it retains jurisdiction to rule on matters collateral to the judgment. (CCP § 916(a).) A motion to tax costs is a collateral matter. (Hennessy v. Superior Court (1924) 194 Cal. 368, 372; Bankes v. Lucas (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 365, 369.) Accordingly, the Notice of Appeal does not divest the court of jurisdiction to decide the motion to tax costs.

  2. Analysis

    In general, the “prevailing party” is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs for suit in any action or proceeding. (CCP, §1032(b); Santisas v. Goodin (1998) 17 Cal.4th 599, 606; Scott Co. Of Calif. v. Blount, Inc. (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1103, 1108.) Assuming the “prevailing party” requirements are met, the trial court has no discretion to order each party to bear his or her own costs of suit. (Michell v. Olick (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 1194, 1198; Nelson v. Anderson (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 111, 129.)

    Allowable costs under CCP Section 1033.5 must be reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation, rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation, and must be reasonable in amount. An item not specifically allowable under Section 1033.5(a) nor prohibited under subdivision (b) may nevertheless be recoverable in the discretion of the court if they meet the above requirements (i.e., reasonably necessary and reasonable in amount). If the items appearing in a cost bill appear to be proper charges, the burden is on the party seeking to tax costs to show that they were not reasonable or necessary. (Ladas v. California State Automotive Assoc. (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761, 773-774.) On the other hand, if the items are properly objected to, they are put in issue and the burden of proof is on the party claiming them as costs. (Ibid.) Whether a cost item was reasonably necessary to the litigation presents a question of fact for the trial court and its decision is reviewed for abuse of discretion. (Ibid.) However, because the right to costs is governed strictly by statute, a court has no discretion to award costs not statutorily authorized. (Id.) Discretion is abused only when, in its exercise, the court “exceeds the bounds of reason, all of the circumstances being considered.” (Ibid.)

    Here, Plaintiff’s move to tax $1,015.00 as costs from item 6 and $1,418.58 from item 16. As to the item 6 costs, Plaintiffs argue $1,015 represent rush delivery fees that were not reasonable or necessary to the conduct of this litigation. Plaintiffs argue there was no need for personal delivery of every document in this action, as Plaintiffs were cooperative throughout and did not require personal delivery of any documents. As to item 16, Plaintiffs contend that $1,418.58 requested as costs for Westlaw research is improper because legal research costs is not a recoverable item under CCP § 1033.5. Plaintiffs further contend the issues in this matter were confined to California law, and there was no need for extensive research on any matters, such as federal laws or the laws of other states.

    The City does not oppose the motion, and thus, does not meet its burden of establishing the costs were necessary and reasonably incurred in the conduct of this litigation. (See Ladas, 19 Cal.App.4th at 773-74.)

    Therefore, Plaintiffs’ motion to tax costs is granted as to $1,015.00 item 6 and $1,418.58 from item 16, for a total of $2,433.58.

    Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice.

    Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If the parties do not submit on the tentative, they should arrange to appear remotely.

Dated this 28th day of September, 2020

Hon. Thomas D. Long

Judge of the Superior Court