Black v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. CA1/1

Filed 5/11/23 Black v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

DOMINIQUE BLACK, Cross-complainant and A165731 Appellant, v. (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. CIV511997) FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, Cross-defendant and Respondent.

Dominque Black appeals from a trial court order amending the judgment to include costs that respondent Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company (Fireman’s Fund) incurred in the trial court and two prior appeals. Black did not challenge the costs in the trial court. Because Black has forfeited his appellate arguments, we affirm the amended judgment. DISCUSSION This is the fourth opinion we have issued in this case. We recite only the facts and procedural history necessary for the disposition of this appeal. The parties are familiar with the facts and history, and our opinion does not

1

meet the criteria for publication. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 81105(c).)1 We thus resolve the case before us with an abbreviated written opinion with reasons stated. (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 14.) Fireman’s Fund sued Black for civil extortion and other causes of action over threats he made after he submitted an insurance claim that was denied. Fireman’s Fund ultimately dismissed its complaint with prejudice, but the litigation did not end because Black filed a cross-complaint. That part of the litigation also ended in Fireman’s Fund’s favor after the trial court granted the company’s request to dismiss the cross-complaint for failure to bring the case to trial within five years. This current appeal arises from an award of costs that Fireman’s Fund incurred over the course of the litigation. Three separate memoranda reflected costs incurred by the company in different phases. The first phase relevant to this appeal was marked by our opinion in the second appeal in this case. (Black v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company (Apr. 23, 2020, A155428) [nonpub. opn.] (Black II).) In Black II, we affirmed an award of sanctions against Black, and we awarded appellate costs to Fireman’s Fund. Shortly after the remittitur was issued, Fireman’s Fund filed in the trial court a memorandum of costs seeking $1,256.70 for the appellate costs it incurred in litigating Black II. Black did not file a motion to strike or to tax costs. On October 13, 2020, the trial court entered judgment in favor of Fireman’s Fund and against Black. The following month, Fireman’s Fund filed in the trial court a second memorandum of costs, seeking $18,010.97 for the costs it incurred in litigating the proceedings in the trial court. Black again did not file a motion to strike or to tax costs.