Douglas

Douglas v. Willis

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 820·27 Cal. App. 4th 287·32 Cal. Rptr. 2d 408·94 Daily Journal DAR 10916·1994 WL 401581
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 3, 1994B077774California1,807 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ortega, J.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying Code of Civil Procedure section 473 (hereafter section 473) relief for plaintiffs’ failure to timely file a motion to tax costs.

Background

Plaintiffs Teri and Richard Douglas attended counseling for several years at the Family Counseling Center. Eventually learning that the counselor, Miriam Tarsky, was unlicensed, plaintiffs sued Tarsky, the center, and its operator Jack Steve Willis.

Willis claimed the center was really a church, the “Temple of the Human Spirit,” and Tarsky was a minister. Plaintiffs settled with Tarsky for $50,000. A jury gave them judgment against the center for $37,500, but assessed no damages against Willis, although finding he had made negligent representations to plaintiffs. The center was entitled to a setoff for the Tarsky settlement, so plaintiffs realized no net monetary recovery from the trial.

Claiming to be a prevailing party, Willis filed a cost bill. Plaintiffs failed to timely move to tax costs, and the trial court entered a costs order of over $16,000 for Willis, after refusing to hear the merits of plaintiffs’ motion to tax. Three days later, plaintiffs filed a section 473 motion for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.