Sorensen

Sorensen v. Superior Court

Good Law
276 Cal. App. 2d 131·80 Cal. Rptr. 481
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 15, 1969Civ. No. 33662California250 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

portion of the court’s- judgment which awarded coste did not accurately reflect the intention of the court.

The issues adjudicated grew out of a controversy between partners. It was the intention of the court to impose costs upon the partners who had instigated the contempt proceeding in the superior court and had defended it in this court, thereby causing the petitioners to incur expenses which were taxable as costs. This court failed to notice that the attorneys for certain partners had also listed James L. Ventura Enterprises, a partnership, and J.L.V. Enterprises, a partnership, as among the “real parties in interest” for whom they appeared.

In awarding costs against the real parties in interest the court was not referring to the partnerships. The court did not intend that the burden of these costs should fall in part upon the petitioners or that the liability of the other partners to pay these costs should depend upon the final determination of the disputes which are the subject of the main action.

For the purpose of making the judgment of this court reflect accurately what was intended, it is ordered:

(1) The remittitur issued to the Superior Court of Santa Barbara…

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.