Document for FRANCESCA FAMBROUGH, et al vs. CITY OF REDWOOD CITY

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Electronically
                                                                        FILED
                                                 By Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo
                                                              ON       01/25/2024
                                                         By        Isi_ Singh, Padmani
                                                                     Deputy Clerk



                 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

                                 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

FRANCESCA FAMBROUGBH, et al.,                   Civil No. 17CIV05387

       Plaintiffs,                              Assigned for All Purposes to
                                                Hon. Marie S. Weiner, Dept. 2
vs.
                                                ORDER GRANTING                      MOTION      TO
REDWOOD       CITY,                             TAX COSTS

       Defendant.


ALLISON MADDEN; WILLIAM
MICHAEL FLEMING; EDWARD
STANCIL; JEDRICK HUMPHRIES;
ALBA LUCIA DIAZ; JONATHAN
REID; TINA REID; and JOHN
CHAMBERS,

       Plaintiffs in Intervention,

vs.


CITY OF REDWOOD          CITY,

       Defendant.




       On January 19, 2024, hearing was held on Defendant’s Motion to Tax Costs and

on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs pursuant to Code of Civil
                                            1
Procedure Section 1036, in Department 2 of this Court before the Honorable Marie S.

Weiner.    Karen Frostrom of Thorsnes Bartolotta McGuire LLP appeared on behalf of all

Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs in Intervention; and Kevin Siegel of Burke Williams & Sorensen

LLP appeared on behalf of Defendant Redwood City.

          Upon due consideration of the briefs and evidence presented, and the oral

argument of counsel for the parties, and the records on file in this action, and having

taken the matter under submission,

          IT IS HEREBY ORDERED         as follows:

          Defendant City of Redwood City’s Motion to Tax Costs is GRANTED IN PART

AND DENIED IN PART.           Counsel for the parties explained at oral argument that they

have mixed together the Plaintiffs’ request for costs and the Defendant’s motion to tax

costs to address them under both Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1033.5 and 1036, and

have not purely separated them.    Accordingly, the Court is issuing an order addressing all

costs requests and taxing in one Order, with a separate Order pertaining only to

attorneys’ fees under Section 1036.

          Defendant’s motion to tax costs of $1908.62 for filing and motion fees is

GRANTED        for the amount of $1137.60, and is DENIED     for the amount of $771.02.

Costs for the motion for class certification was brought by one of the Plaintiffs as to

whom Judgment was entered, and the motion to intervene was granted and brought by

Plaintiffs in Intervention as to whom Judgment was entered.     The other motion feess

taxed were pertaining to Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs in Intervention who settled and/or filed

dismissals.

          Defendant’s motion to tax costs of $404.40 for jury fees is GRANTED, as those

amounts were charged to Plaintiffs who settled prior to Judgment.
Defendant’s motion to tax costs of $9265.82 for deposition costs is DENIED.

The nature of the case and its prosecution and defense is such that these depositions

would have been taken even if the case had only involved these three remaining

Plaintiffs.   The circumstances at Docktown and the actions and inactions of the

Defendant to destroy it would likely have resulted in the taking of the depositions of

these people as witnesses thereto.    As for the depositions of Walther and Vargas, those

were taken in response to issues/defenses raised by Defendant and thus were reasonable

for Plaintiffs to take.

         Defendant’s motion to tax costs for service fees in the amount of $110 is

GRANTED, as they were misapplied to this action.

         Defendant’s motion to tax costs for “expert witness fees” in the amount of $6396

is GRANTED       in the amount of $1649, and is DENIED       in the amount of $4747.    The

costs of three depositions regarding appraisals, in the total amount of $675.00 is

recoverable under Sections 1033.5 and 1036.       Surveys for Plaintiffs who did not proceed

to judgment are not recoverable as costs for these remaining Plaintiffs.      Surveys for the

vessels of the three Plaintiffs who obtained Judgment in the total amount of $2272 is

recoverable under Section 1036.      For purposes of trial it was reasonable and necessary for

the expert to testify to the appraisals/valuation at the jury trial, and thus the fees in the

amount of $1480.00 is recoverable under Section 1036.         The expert witness fees for

Waltham of $320 for his deposition are recoverable under Sections 1033.5 and 1036.

The Court reviewed the cost requests and did not find that it was duplicative of Item #4

on the Memorandum of Costs.

         Defendant’s motion to tax costs for trial court reporter fees in the amount of

$1806 is GRANTED, as those were charges to Plaintiffs who settled before Judgment.
Defendant’s motion to tax costs for certain travel costs of Plaintiffs’ counsel (who

is based in San Diego) in the amount of $10,388.26 is GRANTED in the amount of

$4903.85, as general travel costs are not specifically recoverable; and is DENIED in the

amount of $5484.75 for lodging during the Phase Two Jury Trial which was necessary

and reasonable for trial of the inverse condemnation claims (and thus specifically

recoverable under Section 1036).    Although Defendant disputes the amount of the

lodging, Plaintiffs have provided receipts and the amount is reasonable under the

circumstances.




       Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to tax costs is granted in the total amount of

$10,010.85, and thus Plaintiffs are entitled to award of $57,620.70 in costs (67,631.55

— 10,010.85) of those set forth in the Memorandum of Costs filed October 31, 2023, and

                                                             Electronically
are deemed incorporated into the Judgment.
                                                             SIGNED
                                                           By /s/Weiner, Marie
DATED:           January 23, 2024
                                                               01/25/2024

                                              HON. MARIE S. WEINER
                                              JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
SERVICE LIST
                                    As of January 2024

VINCENT BARTOLOTTA JR.
KAREN FROSTROM
THORSNES BARTOLOTTA
      McGUIRE LLP
2550 Fifth Avenue,   11'" Floor
San Diego, CA    92103
(619) 236-9363
frostrom@tbmlawyers.com

NINA PESCHKE-KOEDT
1548 Maple Street #69
Redwood City CA 94063

VERONICA RAMIREZ
MARY ELEONOR IGNACIO.
CITY ATTORNEY FOR REDWOOD               CITY
1017 Middlefield Road
Redwood City, CA 94063
(650) 780-7200
MICHELLE MARCHETTA KENYON
KEVIN SIEGEL
ALBERT TONG
MAXWELL BLUM
BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENSON LLP
One California Street, Suite 3050
San Francisco, CA 94111-5432
(415) 655-8100
mkenyon@bwslaw.com
ksiegel@bwslaw.com
atong@bwslaw.com
mblum@bswlaw.com