Vickers

City of Los Angeles v. Vickers

Good Law
1927 Cal. App. LEXIS 857·81 Cal. App. 737·254 P. 687
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 15, 1927Docket No. 5301.California1,481 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Works, J.

This action involves the exercise of the right of eminent domain. Decree of condemnation having-gone for plaintiff, defendant Youngworth filed a memorandum of his costs and disbursements, whereupon plaintiff filed its notice of motion to tax the costs. Upon the motion coming on to be heard the trial court made its order denying it. Prom this order plaintiff appeals.

The items of the cost bill to which exception was taken showed the payment of fees to certain experts upon the value of real property, in compensation for their time expended in testifying for respondent. These fees were in addition to and much in excess of amounts payable to witnesses under the law as “witness fees,” strictly so-called, and for mileage. Respondent contends that the charges of the experts for testifying are collectible as “costs,” for the reason that to deny to him a recovery of them would be to lessen the amount awarded to him for his lands by the condemnation decree. The result, so he says, will be a violation of the constitutional inhibition against the taking of private property for public use without just compensation. Appellant contends that the charges are not collectible as costs at all.

We…

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.