DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23CV056273·alameda·Civil·Civil
Hearing todayDENIED

SMITH, et al. vs AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC.

Motion to Tax Costs

Hearing date
Sep 9, 2026
Department
19
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Tax Costs rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSandra M. Smith
PlaintiffShane D. Smith
DefendantAmerican Honda Motor Company, Inc.

Ruling

23CV056273: SMITH, et al. vs AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC. 09/09/2026 Hearing on Motion to Tax Costs filed by Sandra M. Smith (Plaintiff) + CRS# 693388355280 in Department 19

Tentative Ruling - 09/02/2026 Joscelyn Jones

The Motion to Tax Costs filed by Sandra M. Smith, Shane D. Smith on 03/16/2026 is Denied.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike and/or Tax Defendant’s Costs is DENIED.

This motion was previously scheduled for hearing on August 3, 2026. It was continued to September 9 because the Court could not tell from Plaintiffs’ memorandum which of the 45 separate filing fees claimed by Defendant that Plaintiff seeks to strike.

The Court’s August 3, 2026 order continuing the hearing required that by no later than August 19, Plaintiffs file and serve a supplemental brief of no more than three double spaced pages identifying which of the filing fees Plaintiffs seek to strike, and why. The supplemental brief was to identify the filing fees by their corresponding number on Defendant’s Memorandum of Costs (i.e., lines 1(a) – 1(ss).)

Plaintiffs failed to file the required supplemental brief. This motion is DENIED on that basis.

PLEASE NOTE that if anyone contests this tentative ruling, counsel must appear at the hearing in person (not by Zoom.)

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share