Is an employer entitled to a cost of action against an employee who sued for retaliation against the employer?

Anders e n v. Pacific Bell (1988) 204 Cal.App.3d 277, 251 Cal.Rptr. 66 (Anders e n ), cited by real parties and the trial court, is distinguishable. Anders e n held that an employer was entitled to an award of costs following its successful summary judgment against employees. The employer prevailed on summary judgment because the employees, who sued for retaliatory discipline, could not prove they had been disciplined. Despite this, the trial court declined to award trial costs to the employer, reasoning that the remaining employee plaintiffs might yet prove that they had been disciplined (and damaged) because of employer's same unlawful practices. On appeal, Anders e n disagreed, finding the employer's statutory right as prevailing party to recover its own costs from the dismissed plaintiffs is not dependent on any hypothetical, future right the remaining plaintiffs might have to recover their different costs. (Id. at pp. 286287, 251 Cal.Rptr. 66.)