Murphy vs Desert Inn Motel

TENTATIVE RULING(S) FOR August 26, 2026 Department S37 – Judge Winston Keh This court follows California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(b) for tentative rulings. (See San Bernardino Superior Court Local Emergency Rule 8.) Tentative rulings for each law & motion will be posted on the internet (https://www.sb-court.org) by 3:00 p.m. on the court day immediately before the hearing.

You may appear in person at the hearing although remote appearance by CourtCall is preferred. (See www.sb-court.org/general-information/remote-access).

If you do not have Internet access or if you experience difficulty with the posted tentative ruling, you may obtain the tentative ruling by calling the department (S-37) at (909) 708-8707 or the Administrative Assistant (909) 708-8756, who prepared the ruling.

If you (or both parties) wish to submit on the Tentative, notify the other party and call the department by 4:00 pm the day before and your appearance may be excused unless the Court orders you to appear.

You must appear at the hearing if you are so directed by the court in the tentative ruling. Be prepared to address those issues set forth by the court in its ruling.

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, THE PREVAILING PARTY IS TO GIVE NOTICE OF THE

RULING.

Murphy vs Desert Inn Motel (highly recommended)

__________________________________________________________________________

TENTATIVE RULING(S):

Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Tax Costs. The Motion seeks to tax costs from the

Memorandum of Costs filed by Plaintiff on May 8, 2026. Plaintiff filed an Opposition supported by

the declarations of Germain Labat and Tomas Ross. No reply has been filed as of August 20,

2026.

Having considered the moving and opposing papers, the declarations submitted, and the

I. Court Reporter Fees

Moving Defendants request the court strike $42,849.50 in court reporter fees. While statutory

court reporter fees are allowable under section 1033.5, transcripts of court proceedings not

ordered by the court are not allowable unless expressly authorized by law. (Code Civ. Proc., §

1033.5, subd. (a)(11) and (b)(5).)

Plaintiff contends that these transcripts were essential at trial and were reasonably incurred to

protect his rights for post-trial litigation or appellate review. However, Plaintiff fails to cite a

specific statute or court order that expressly authorizes these costs. Under section 1033.5,

subdivision (b)(5), transcripts are not allowable as costs unless ordered by the court.

Accordingly, the Court grants the request to strike the $42,849.50 in court reporter fees.

II. Other Fees

Items not mentioned in section 1033.5 and items assessed upon application may be allowed or

denied in the court's discretion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (c)(4).) Moving Defendants

dispute $49,841.59 in "other fees" and $11,300.50 in costs for food, lodging, gas, and cleaning.

Regarding the prejudgment interest of $35,155.18, Plaintiff asserts entitlement pursuant to a

section 998 offer made on January 13, 2026. The jury subsequently returned a verdict of

$1,734,000, significantly exceeding the $500,000 offer. The Court finds that Plaintiff’s section

998 settlement offer was made in good faith and that he has made a prima facie showing of such

by prevailing at trial for a sum significantly greater than the offer. Consequently, Plaintiff is

entitled to prejudgment interest at the legal rate of ten percent per annum. (Code Civ. Proc., §§

998, 3291.) The request to strike this $35,155.18 is denied.

Regarding the remaining disputed $14,326.41 and $11,300.50, the burden is on the Plaintiff to

justify these costs by providing evidence that they were reasonable and necessarily incurred.

(Ladas v. California State Auto. Assn. (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761, 774.) Plaintiff argues that

these costs—including hotel, rental car, and gas—were necessary because former trial counsel,

Tomas Ross, did not reside or maintain an office in San Bernardino County. The Court finds that

the declaration of Labat fails to provide sufficient information to determine if these costs were

reasonable and necessary; rather, they appear to have been incurred for convenience.

Accordingly, the Court strikes the $14,326.41 and the $11,300.50 in other costs.

III. Attorney’s Fees

Moving Defendants dispute $3,800 in attorney’s fees for outside counsel. Plaintiff has waived

this cost claim in his Opposition. Accordingly, the Court strikes the $3,800 in attorney’s fees.

RULING

For the reasons stated above, the Court rules as follows:

1. Moving Defendants’ Motion to Tax Costs is granted in part.

2. The following amounts are struck from Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Costs:

• $42,849.50 (Court reporter fees)

• $14,326.41 (Other costs)

• $11,300.50 (Other costs)

• $3,800.00 (Attorney’s fees)

• Total Struck: $72,276.41

The Court grants the remaining $74,567.80 in requested costs.