Does an order granting an anti-SLAPP motion trigger the 15-day timeframe for filing a cost memorandum?

Courts have recently determined that an order granting an anti-SLAPP motion which disposes of the entire action constitutes a final judgment; however, no published decision has considered whether such an order triggers the 15-day time frame for filing a cost memorandum.

Code of Civil Procedure section 577 defines a judgment as “the final determination of the rights of the parties in an action or proceeding.” “[A] judgment, no matter how designated, is the final determination of the rights of the parties in an action. Thus, an ‘order’ which is the final determination in the action is the judgment.” Passavanti v. Williams (1990) 225 Cal.App.3d 1602, 1606. In Marshall v. Webber (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 275, 277, the defendant filed a special motion to strike the complaint pursuant to section 425.16. The court filed a five-page single spaced, signed order granting defendant’s motion. Id. The order “thoroughly discussed the relevant factual and legal issues before ruling that ‘[d]efendant’s special motion to strike the verified complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16 is granted.”’ Id. at 277-278. “It further provided that ‘[d]efendant may file a noticed motion regarding his requested attorney fees and costs.”’ The court held the order was a final judgment.

Pursuant to rule 3.1702(b) of the California Rules of Court, a motion seeking fees following an order granting an anti-SLAPP motion must be served and filed within the time limits for filing a notice of appeal. Under rule 8.104(a) and (f), a notice of appeal must be filed on or before 60 days after service of a document entitled “Notice of Entry” of the order granting the anti-SLAPP motion by the superior court clerk or a party; otherwise, the notice of appeal must be filed on or before 180 days after the entry of the order granting the anti-SLAPP motion. Mallard v. Progressive Choice Ins. Co. (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 531, 545. Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1700(a)(1), there is a 15-day timeframe for filing a cost memorandum, which is calculated from the date of entry of a judgment. Therefore, the deadline in which to file a cost memorandum will necessarily be earlier than the deadline to file a motion for fees and costs. This is impractical. And in my view, it violates the intent of the anti-SLAPP statute.

Given that no published decision has considered this precise question, it can be argued that courts have discretion to award costs. In my experience 99% of judges will not deny costs if a costs memorandum has not been filed within the 15 day period.

Buffer