Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Costs
Prasad Shankar v. Monterey County DCSS
Hearing date: April 24, 2026
MOTION: Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Costs Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5 Prasad Shankar (“Plaintiff”) requests the court tax defendant’s claimed costs in the amount of $2,799.55 as not allowable.
DISCUSSION: California Rule of Court 3.1700(b) provides that a party may dispute the items in another party’s costs memorandum by way of a motion to strike or tax costs. 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 Auto. Ass’n (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761, 774. However, “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.” Id. 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. Bender v. County of Los Angeles (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 968, 989.
Defendant, Monterey County DCSS (“Defendant”) submitted a Memorandum of Costs in the Amount of $2,799.55 for deposition transcript expenses (“Transcripts”). In response, to the instant motion, Defendant submitted Invoices #13102; 13104; 13113 as Attachment A to the Declaration of Aerin C. Murphy in support of County’s Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Costs (“Declaration”).
Plaintiff contends Defendant has not shown that the costs are reasonably necessary in the litigation. However, the Declaration at paragraph 8 states: “Plaintiff relied heavily on deposition excerpts in opposing the County’s motion for summary judgment, citing to the Lisa Ortiz and Darrell McGowan deposition transcripts throughout his opposition and separate statement filings. In addition, Plaintiff authenticated and relied on Mr. McGowan’s deposition testimony by declaration. Based on Plaintiff’s substantial reliance on these depositions, the County found it necessary to order a copy of these five depositions in order to review the deponents’ testimony and adequately respond to Plaintiff’s opposition and supporting documents. “ This information is sufficient to find that it was reasonable, and reasonably necessary, for the Plaintiff to order these Transcripts to prepare for motions and potential trial.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
California Code of Civil Procedure §1033.5(a)(3)(A) expressly allows recovery of costs for "one copy of depositions taken by the party against whom costs are allowed."
Similarly, the added costs (e.g. word indexing, electronic copies) were all useful to the County and likely helped its attorneys save time in preparation and prepare more accurately.
The Motion to Tax Costs is DENIED.
NOTE RE: TENTATIVE RULING This tentative ruling becomes the court’s order, and no hearing shall be held unless one of the parties contests it by complying with Rule 3.1308 of the California Rules of Court and Monterey County Local Rule 7.9.
Those parties wishing to present an oral argument must notify all other parties and the Court no later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing; otherwise, NO ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE PERMITTED, AND THE TENTATIVE RULING WILL BECOME THE ORDER OF THE COURT AND THE HEARING VACATED. You must notify the court by emailing TentativeRulings@monterey.courts.ca.gov or by telephoning the Calendar Department at (831) 647-5800, extension 3040, before 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing.