Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Downey v. Gonzales

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 28, 1968No. Civ. 31295Published

1DissentKaus, P. J.

I agree that defendants were entitled to a witness fee and mileage for the eighth day and I also agree that the trial court properly struck the item for expenses incurred with respect to the photographs. I do not agree that defendants were entitled to more than one witness fee for any day when their expert was in court, although he may have attended as a witness on behalf of more than one party.

Witness fees are allowed for attending court, not for testifying. (Gov. Code, § 68093; Prichard v. Southern Pac. Co., 9 Cal.App.2d 701, 706 [51 P.2d 426]; Starmont v. Cummins, 120 Mich. 629 [79 N.W.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Heimann v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. City of San Francisco v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  3. City of Los Angeles v. VickersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  4. People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. BowmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Vilsack v. General Commercial Securities Corp.Supreme Court of Florida · 1932

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API