BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                       AB 1002|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                                      CONSENT 


          Bill No:  AB 1002
          Author:   Wilk (R) and Alejo (D)
          Amended:  5/7/15 in Assembly
          Vote:     21  

           SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE:  7-0, 6/16/15
           AYES:  Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning,  
            Wieckowski

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  78-0, 5/14/15 (Consent) - See last page for  
            vote

           SUBJECT:   Civil actions: interpreter costs


          SOURCE:   Conference of California Bar Associations



          DIGEST:  This bill adds the fees of a certified or registered  
          interpreter for the deposition of a party or witness who does  
          not proficiently speak or understand the English language to the  
          list of fees recoverable by a prevailing party.


          ANALYSIS:   


          Existing law:


          1)Provides that except as otherwise provided by statute, a  
            prevailing party, as defined, is entitled as a matter of right  
            to recover costs in any action or proceeding.   









                                                                    AB 1002  
                                                                    Page  2



          2)Enumerates the items allowable as costs under the above  
            provision, including specified costs relating to both  
            depositions and court reporters.  Specifically, existing law  
            lists the following as recoverable costs, among other things:

                 Filing, motion, and jury fees; 
                 Juror food and lodging, as specified; 
                 Taking, video recording, and transcribing necessary  
               depositions, as specified; 
                 Ordinary witness fees, as specified; 
                 Transcripts of court proceedings ordered by the court; 
                 Court reporter fees as established by statute; 
                 Court interpreter fees for a qualified court interpreter  
               authorized by the court for an indigent person represented  
               by a qualified legal service project, as specified;
                 Models and blowups of exhibits and photocopies of  
               exhibits that may be allowed if they were reasonably  
               helpful to aid the trier of fact; and 
                 Any other item that is required to be awarded to the  
               prevailing party pursuant to statute as an incident to  
               prevailing in the action at trial or on appeal.  

          1)Expressly prohibits the recovery of certain fees: 

                 Fees of experts not ordered by the court;
                 Investigation expenses in preparing the case for trial;
                 Postage, telephone, and photocopying charges, except for  
               exhibits;
                 Costs in investigation of jurors or in preparation for  
               voir dire; and
                 Transcripts of court proceedings not ordered by the  
               court.   

          1)Provides that any award of costs is subject to the following  
            provisions, among others:

                 Allowable costs shall be reasonably necessary to the  
               conduct of the litigation rather than merely convenient or  
               beneficial to its preparation; 
                 Allowable costs shall be reasonable in amount; and
                 Items not mentioned in this section and items assessed  
               upon application may be allowed or denied in the court's  








                                                                    AB 1002  
                                                                    Page  3



               discretion.

          This bill: 


          1)Adds to the above list of recoverable fees: the fees of a  
            certified or registered interpreter for the deposition of a  
            party or witness who does not proficiently speak or understand  
            the English language.


          2)Makes other technical and nonsubstantive changes. 


          Background


          The California Code of Civil Procedure permits various costs to  
          be recovered by a prevailing party, as specified, including  
          certain costs relating to depositions.  Until a few years ago,  
          there was no provision expressly providing for the recovery of  
          any costs for court interpreters provided to non-English  
          speakers in civil cases.  In 2011, AB 1403 (Committee on  
          Judiciary, Chapter 409, Statutes of 2011), created a limited  
          remedy by providing for recovery of costs for qualified court  
          interpreters authorized by the court for indigent non-English  
          speakers who are represented by a qualified legal services  
          project, as specified.  Following AB 1403, in 2012 AB 2684  
          (Committee on Judiciary, Chapter 758, Statutes of 2012) was  
          enacted to add that court interpreter fees can be recovered by a  
          prevailing party for a qualified court interpreter authorized by  
          the court for an indigent non-English speaker who is represented  
          by a pro bono attorney, as defined.  More recently, legislation  
          has been enacted to recognize the right of non-English speakers  
          and limited-English speakers to interpreters in civil actions  
          and proceedings, free of cost, regardless of the parties'  
          income.  (See AB 1657, Gomez, Chapter 721, Statutes of 2014.)


          This bill now ensures that costs for providing a certified or  
          registered interpreter for a non-English or limited English  
          speaker in a deposition are also recoverable by a prevailing  








                                                                    AB 1002  
                                                                    Page  4



          party. 


          Comment


          As stated by the author: 


            Although existing law makes the cost of taking, video  
            recording, and transcribing necessary depositions, and related  
            travel costs, specifically reimbursable, it does not mention  
            interpreter fees related to the conduct of the deposition.  
            Interpreter fees are allowed as a reimbursable cost under  
            existing law only when the party is both indigent and  
            represented by either a legal services organization or a pro  
            bono attorney (and not even when the party is indigent and  
            representing him- or herself). Therefore, interpreter fees in  
            depositions are reimbursable only in the court's discretion  
            pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) of the section.  


            At worst, because of the strict limitation on reimbursement of  
            interpreter fees, existing law can be read to discourage  
            reimbursement of those fees incurred in deposition.  At best,  
            the cost of interpreters for non-English speaking deponents  
            and parties must be pleaded as an additional element of costs,  
            with no guarantee they will be reimbursed.


            AB 1002 will help increase access to justice for  
            non-English-speaking Californians by making interpreter fees  
            incurred during the taking of necessary depositions a  
            reimbursable cost under [Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) Sec.]  
            1033.5. [ . . . ]


          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:NoLocal:    No


          SUPPORT:   (Verified6/19/15)








                                                                    AB 1002  
                                                                    Page  5





          Conference of California Bar Associations (source)


          OPPOSITION:   (Verified6/19/15)


          None received

          ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  78-0, 5/14/15
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom,  
            Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang,  
            Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle,  
            Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina  
            Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez,  
            Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden,  
            Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Lopez, Low,  
            Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Melendez, Mullin,  
            Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea,  
            Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago,  
            Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber,  
            Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Linder, Medina


           Prepared by:Ronak Daylami / JUD. / (916) 651-4113
          6/19/15 14:34:24


                                   ****  END  ****