Are expert witness fees in a personal injury action bonded?

The second argument advanced by defendants is related to the first, but is even more questionable. Defendants urge that since the judgment included an award for expert witness fees, and since such costs are clearly "non-routine," they must be bonded; and since they must be bonded, the entire judgment must be bonded. (Banks v. Manos, supra, 232 Cal.App.3d at p. 129, 283 Cal.Rptr. 318.) We reject this argument for two reasons:

(1) The defendants state that the payment for expert witnesses was claimed as part of their contractual "litigation expenses," not their allowable costs. ⁶ In other words, these are part of those expenses permitted under the contract to be recovered upon a successful conclusion of an action arising under the parties' contract. In this regard, they are no different than the attorney's fees provided for in the contract and we see no reason to treat them differently. Thus, the expert witness fees in this case ⁷ which defendants stress so heavily, are simply part of the contractual fees and costs which, under the applicable statutes, are to be treated as costs for purposes of the section 916 automatic stay. (Nielsen v. Stumbos, supra, 226 Cal.App.3d at pp. 303-305, 276 Cal.Rptr. 272.)