Sabella

Rostack Invs., Inc. v. Sabella

Good Law
243 Cal. Rptr. 3d 527·32 Cal. App. 5th 70
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 2019B286069California4,702 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rubin, J.

*73 Plaintiff Rostack Investments, Inc. obtained a summary judgment against defendant Angela Sabella in an amount exceeding $50 million. We reversed the judgment on appeal, and awarded Sabella her costs as prevailing party. Sabella's memorandum of costs sought to recover approximately $1.4 million in costs related to her obtaining a surety bond, secured by a letter of credit, pending the appeal. Rostack moved to tax those costs, on the basis that they were neither reasonable nor necessary, in that Sabella had sufficient assets to obtain *529 a cash-collateralized bond (without needing a letter of credit). The trial court denied the motion to tax, concluding that Sabella's bond-related expenses were both reasonable and necessary. The court entered judgment against Rostack for the full amount of the disputed costs, and Rostack appeals. We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. The Underlying Dispute

Rostack brought suit against Sabella for breach of contract, based on a note with outstanding principal of over $28 million. In Rostack's operative complaint, it sought unpaid principal and interest, as well as attorney fees and costs of collection, based on an attorney…

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.