Samsky

Samsky v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Good Law
249 Cal. Rptr. 3d 152·36 Cal. App. 5th 875
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 26, 2019B293885California3,505 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Stratton, J.

This appeal challenges the superior court's denial of appellant's motion for costs of proof after respondent denied eight of his requests for admission (RFAs). Appellant Aaron Samsky prevailed at the arbitration of the parties' dispute, and then moved for an award of costs of proving matters State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) denied in the RFAs. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.420, subdivisions (a) and (b), 1 the trial court denied the motion, incorrectly placing on appellant the burden to prove that none of the exceptions to an award of costs as set out in subdivision (b) applied. State Farm should have carried the burden of proof and it failed to do so. We reverse and remand the matter to the trial court to determine appellant's reasonable costs of proof.

BACKGROUND

On July 27, 2015, appellant's vehicle was hit from behind by a potentially underinsured driver; the accident was part of a multivehicle collision. On September 10, 2015, appellant's vehicle was hit from behind again by a potentially underinsured driver. Appellant claimed he suffered a concussion, traumatic brain injury, and ulnar nerve injury to his wrist in the July…

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.