From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Novato Unified Sch. Dist.

California Court of Appeals, First District, Fifth Division
May 21, 2007
No. A111219 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 21, 2007)

Opinion


ANDREW D. SMITH et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. NOVATO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT et al., Defendants and Respondents. A111219 California Court of Appeal, First District, Fifth Division May 21, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

Marin County Super. Ct. No. CV022210

GEMELLO, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a costs award entered in favor of defendants after defendants prevailed on the merits at trial. Because by separate order entered today we reverse the judgment on the merits in appeal number A112083, we also reverse the award of costs to defendants.

Factual and Procedural Background

Plaintiffs Andrew D. Smith (Smith) and his father Dale R. Smith brought suit against defendants Novato Unified School District (District); Lisa Schwartz, acting principal of Novato High School; and John Bernard, the Superintendent of the District. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants violated the United States and California Constitutions and the California Education Code in their actions relating to two opinion editorials written by Smith and published in the school newspaper. Following a bench trial, the trial court found in favor of the defendants on all claims.

A detailed factual and procedural summary is provided in our separate decision on the merits in appeal number A112083.

Defendants filed an amended memorandum of costs seeking a costs award of $21,290.52. Plaintiffs filed a motion to tax costs, challenging various costs claimed by defendants. The trial court awarded defendants total costs of $20,981.88.

Discussion

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 1032, subdivision (b), “a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding.” Because we reverse the judgment in favor of defendants in appeal number A112083, the costs award must be reversed as well. (Merced County Taxpayers’ Assn. v. Cardella (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 396, 402 [“An order awarding costs falls with a reversal of the judgment on which it is based”].)

The District’s February 15, 2006 motion for sanctions against plaintiffs for filing the costs appeal is denied.

Disposition

The trial court order awarding costs to defendants is reversed.

We concur. SIMONS, Acting P.J., NEEDHAM, J.


Summaries of

Smith v. Novato Unified Sch. Dist.

California Court of Appeals, First District, Fifth Division
May 21, 2007
No. A111219 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 21, 2007)
Case details for

Smith v. Novato Unified Sch. Dist.

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW D. SMITH et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. NOVATO UNIFIED…

Court:California Court of Appeals, First District, Fifth Division

Date published: May 21, 2007

Citations

No. A111219 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 21, 2007)

Citing Cases

Smith v. Novato Unified School Dist.

(Smith, supra, 150 Cal.App.4th at p. 1445.) The court also concluded defendants were prevailing parties…

Smith v. Novato Unified School Dist.

In the unpublished part of the decision we conclude that the District did not infringe plaintiffs rights…