Waived Costs & Fees: How can prevailing plaintiff require that defendant pay to court

[trosoft]

Jurisdiction

California

In my unlimited jurisdiction civil case, the Los Angeles Municipal Court very recently awarded me a monetary (default) judgment against defendants, both jointly and severally. However, the ruling did not perfunctorily include an order that defendants pay to the court my waived fees and costs, which total several thousand dollars. I did not request such in my [proposed] judgment, as I thought it was superfluous; see California Government Code § 68637 further below. Aside from the indications within file records, the presiding judge knew that my court fees and costs had been waived, as I had mentioned such at the prove-up hearing, i.e., when he had asked me to state my out-of-pocket costs.

My position is that defendants ought to be required to pay my initially waived fees and costs to the court. I had believed—regardless of the absence of a court order directing defendants to pay my waived fees and costs to the court—that defendants were liable therefor; and accordingly, defendants would not be able to obtain a satisfaction of judgment until paying them in full. (California Government Code § 68637.)

How do I make it so that defendants must pay to the court my initially waived court fees and costs; or, is it a given? (I don't want to be required to pay those fees and costs out of the proceeds of any judgment collection.) Need I formally request the court to modify the judgement and explicitly order defendants pay such fees and costs to the court? If so, any advice, e.g. type of motion?

I have already recorded an abstract of judgment and also obtained a writ of execution (monetary judgment), i.e., for bank levy. Will these instruments become mooted or otherwise invalidated if the judgment is modified as aforementioned?

I have read California Government Code § 68637, which concerns initially waived trial court fees and costs.

[California Government Code § 68637 provides, in relevant part, the following:

"(a) This section applies only to waivers of trial court fees.

(b) (1) If a party whose trial court fees and costs were initially waived is a prevailing party within the meaning of Section 1032 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the judgmentor dismissal entered in favor of the party whose fees and costs were initially waived shall include an order requiring that the party against whom judgment or dismissal has been entered pay to the court the waived fees and costs. The court may refuse to enter a partial or full satisfaction of a judgment until an accompanying order requiring payment of waived fees and costs has been satisfied...
(2) A party petitioning the court to enter satisfaction of judgment shall declare, under penalty of perjury, that any order requiring payment of waived fees and costs has been satisfied...

(c) If a party in a civil case whose trial court fees and costs were initially waived recovers ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or more in value by way of settlement, compromise, arbitration award, mediation settlement, or other recovery, the waived fees and costs shall be paid to the court out of the settlement, compromise, award, or other recovery.
(1) The court shall have a lien on any settlement, compromise, award, or other recovery in the amount of all the court fees and costs initially waived.
(2) The waived fees and costs shall first be paid to the court before the party whose fees and costs were initially waived receives anything of value under the settlement, compromise, award, or other recovery" (emphasis added)]

 

[army judge]

You can only receive the relief you seek.

If you don't seek a remedy or specific relief, the court won't infer relief that you failed to seek.

 

[adjusterjack]

Agree.

You didn't file for it, it isn't going to happen.

Besides, you're going to have trouble collecting on a default judgment anyway.

 

[trosoft]

You can only receive the relief you seek.

If you don't seek a remedy or specific relief, the court won't infer relief that you failed to seek.

I realized that, generally speaking. However, I read the "shall" as meaning "must," and not "may:"

"(b) (1) If a party whose trial court fees and costs were initially waived is a prevailing party within the meaning of Section 1032 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the judgment or dismissal entered in favor of the party whose fees and costs were initially waived shall include an order requiring that the party against whom judgment or dismissal has been entered pay to the court the waived fees and costs."

So, as it stands now, I am stuck paying those fees and costs out of the proceeds of the $70k judgment. One defendant has three real properties, whose value exceeds 3.5 million USD; also one of her businesses generates ~25k monthly revenue from quasi-governmental sources. I am in the process of judgment enforcement and I am substantially certain that I have a high probability of collecting the full amount due to me, including judgment principal, costs and interest.

That said, I ask you experts if a motion for judgment modification may be an appropriate way to make it so defendants are ordered to pay my initially waived costs and fees; and also, how any such modification might adversely affect the validity of already issued writ of execution and recorded abstract of judgment.

 

[army judge]

I realized that, generally speaking. However, I read the "shall" as meaning "must," and not "may:"


That said, I ask you experts if a motion for judgment modification may be an appropriate way to make it so defendants are ordered to pay my initially waived costs and fees; and also, how any such modification might adversely affect the validity of already issued writ of execution and recorded abstract of judgment.

All lawyers read the law.
Some lawyers became lawyers by reading the law, as in former president Abe Lincoln.

Judges interpret the law.

Statutes say many things, which mean many things.

Whether a judge interprets a statute to mean XYZ, although the statute says 123, has nothing to do with pleadings.

In your petition for relief is where you inform the court why you've come before it and what relief you're petitioning the court to grant.

It's a very simple concept that has worked well, in our country, for almost 250 years.

The statute to which you're referencing isn't dispositive as to your prayer for relief.

On a practical note, fewer than 5-10% of small claims litigants ever collect a dollar of their judgment.

Translation, I'd be more concerned whether I could collect from the defendant, than trying to get the court to collect any costs and/or fees.

There's a reason the court won't bother chasing a deadbeat, and that has to do with squeezing blood from a turnip, ain't happening because it can't happen.

 

[trosoft]

Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor's "Apology:"

I hardly regard the outcome of my civil suit as being a hollow or Pyrrhic victory. Nor do I regard the various challenges and temporary setbacks in pursuit thereof (which I persevered and overcame) as having been in vain. Both the former and the latter served in the furtherance of some semblance of closure arising out of the myriads of intentional wrongdoing to which defendants had subjected me.

Moreover, I do not now question whether I had erred in drafting my [proposed] judgment. It ought to be intuitively obvious that I am trying to effect damage control, and hence my most humble appeal to this forum for advice.

At the risk of seeming crude, regardless of any speculation as to the collection-proof nature of defendants, I would certainly sincerely appreciate it if someone would please indulge me and answer my aforementioned questions?

That is to say, (a) would a motion for judgment modification be an appropriate way to make it so defendants are ordered to pay my initially waived costs and fees; and also, (b) how any such modification might adversely affect the validity of already issued writ of execution and recorded abstract of judgment.

 

[army judge]

would a motion for judgment modification be an appropriate way to make it so defendants are ordered to pay my initially waived costs and fees

Appropriate isn't a legal term.

Legally, you paid nothing, as the court waived your filing fees and costs.

That isn't unusual, and one unable to pay such fees is allowed to file "in forma pauperis".

You suffered no additional damages.

You can't recover that which you never lost.

However, you're free to file a motion to seek any such relief you believe is available to you.

You'll be allowed, if the judge is convinced, to make your argument before the court.

how any such modification might adversely affect the validity of already issued writ of execution and recorded abstract of judgment.

Res judicata, the matter rests.

If you believe you are owed additional monies, you can litigate that matter by bringing a new lawsuit.

 

[trosoft]

I give up; I want the payments for initially waived costs and fees to be made by defendants to the court, not to me.
Moreover, regarding certain various replies, I did not visit this site to be insulted with presumptuous and gratuitous innuendos and strawman-type fallacious reasoning and personal attacks.
SEE my original post, my references to California Government Code § 68637, as well as the title itself, you would recognize that I am trying to have such payments made to the court itself, as reimbursement for the waived costs and fees which I incurred.

 

[army judge]

I give up; I want the payments for initially waived costs and fees to be made by defendants to the court, not to me.
Moreover, regarding certain various replies, I did not visit this site to be insulted with presumptuous and gratuitous innuendos and strawman-type fallacious reasoning and personal attacks.
SEE my original post, my references to California Government Code § 68637, as well as the title itself, you would recognize that I am trying to have such payments made to the court itself, as reimbursement for the waived costs and fees which I incurred.

Great, I'm closing the thread.

You are free to consult licensed lawyers in the county where you reside.



Legal Disclaimer


The information contained in this web site is provided to you "AS IS", does not constitute legal advice, is governed by our Terms and Conditions Of Use, and we are not acting as your attorney. We make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this web site and its associated sites.

The law changes very rapidly and, accordingly, we do not guarantee that any information on this web site or our affiliated web sites are accurate and up to date. Additionally, the law differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and is subject to interpretation of courts located in each county. Legal advice must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case and the tools and information provided to you may not be an appropriate fit in your case. Nothing that you read or is provided on this web site should be used as a substitute for the advice of competent legal counsel.

Postings in the Forums, Message Boards, Guides and any other areas of and through our web site are for educational and information purposes only. They are not legal advice or legal opinions. Transmission of the information is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship between TheLaw.com, LLC, The Law Network (as defined in our legal terms of use), the author(s), and you or anyone else except as explicitly set forth in a signed writing. The opinions expressed in the postings may be opinions of the authors and do not reflect the opinions of The Law Network, its employees or agents. The seals, trademarks, or other advertising that may appear on our site or within our articles shall not be considered to create any sponsorship or affiliation with such other web site or author. The Law Network, its employees, agents, or others that provide information on or through this web site will not be liable or responsible to you for any claim, loss, injury, liability, or damages related to your use of this site or any site linked to this site.

Closed...................