Diaz

Diaz v. Gau CA6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 25, 2022H048094California2,719 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lie, J.

I. BACKGROUND

On July 3, 2017, Diaz sued Gau for negligence and negligence per se. Diaz alleged that on November 18, 2016, he was travelling on his motorcycle when Gau’s vehicle struck him. Diaz, then 34, suffered significant orthopedic injuries and a permanently disabling traumatic brain injury. At trial, the jury returned a verdict finding that Gau was liable for Diaz’s injuries and awarding economic damages of $3,732,550.50. The award omitted noneconomic damages, because Diaz’s own insurance policy at the time of the collision did not cover his motorcycle. Eighteen months before trial, Diaz had offered to settle with Gau for $999,999.99, with a mutual waiver of costs. In making the offer, Diaz specified that his offer was made pursuant to section 998 (998 offer); Gau did not accept. Accordingly, after trial, Diaz filed a memorandum of costs seeking to recover costs from Gau, including $586,983.88 in prejudgment interest under Civil Code section 3291 and $247,014.08 in expert fees. Diaz itemized the total fees incurred for each of 13 named experts. Gau filed a motion to strike or tax costs, contending that all costs were unnecessary, excessive, and not recoverable. Gau…

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.