Del Rosario v. Jing Hwa Wang

Summary

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals reviewed an appeal concerning an award of litigation costs, including deposition, interpreter, and filing fees, following the successful defense of a personal injury claim arising from an automobile accident. The court held that the appeal was properly reviewable, rejected the challenge to the original cost award under Super. Ct. Civ. R. 63, and found no prejudice from the successor judge's failure to certify familiarity with the record when denying the motion to alter or amend. The court affirmed the judgment.

Holdings

1. An appeal challenging only an award of costs is within the court's power to review when the challenge concerns the trial court's legal authority to award particular costs or the manner in which the award was made; an appeal does not permit review of the merits of the underlying judgment.
2. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 63 requires a successor judge to certify familiarity with the record before deciding a post-trial or post-award motion such as a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend.
3. The successor judge's failure to certify familiarity with the record did not require reversal because the omission caused no prejudice to the plaintiffs' substantial rights.
4. A prevailing defendant-intervenor may receive an award of costs and stands in the same position as an original prevailing party for purposes of taxing costs.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the District of Columbia Court of Appeals had authority to review an appeal limited to an award of costs.
2. Whether Super. Ct. Civ. R. 63 required the successor judge to certify familiarity with the record before deciding the plaintiffs' Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the cost award.
3. Whether the failure to make the Rule 63 certification required reversal under the District of Columbia's harmless-error statute.
4. Whether the trial court lawfully awarded costs to MAIF as a prevailing defendant-intervenor, including deposition and interpreter costs.

Disposition

affirmed