Briggs

Briggs v. Elliott CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 26, 2023D080283California5,162 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

San Diego City Attorney Mara Elliott successfully moved to strike a defamation complaint filed against her by a former political rival, Cory Briggs, under the anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 et seq.1 Elliott spent the next seven months fruitlessly trying to collect on the unsatisfied judgment. She then filed a verified memorandum of costs claiming $13,789.10 in postjudgment collection costs, including $12,941.20 in attorney’s fees and $847.90 in other costs. The trial court awarded her the claimed costs, as well as $2,294.07 in postjudgment interest. Briggs appeals the cost award and argues it was flawed for four reasons: (1) the judgment was satisfied before Elliott filed the memorandum of costs, thus rendering the memorandum of costs untimely; (2) a judgment creditor who prevails on an anti-SLAPP motion may only recover collection- related attorney’s fees by filing a motion for fees, not a memorandum of costs; (3) the costs claimed in the memorandum of costs were unnecessary and unreasonable; and (4) the trial court miscalculated the interest accrued on the outstanding judgment principal.…

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.