Evance v. Trumann Health Services LLC et al

Filing 65

ORDER granting 59 Defendants' Motion for Costs. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 1/18/2013. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION JENNY EVANCE V. PLAINTIFF 3:11CV00025 TRUMANN HEALTH SERVICES, LLC fictitiously known as TRUMANN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER; BETTY BEGLEY; GLADIS CORTINAS; JACKIE KELLY and JACKY HOLT DEFENDANTS ORDER Pending is Defendants’ motion for costs. (Docket #59). Plaintiff has filed a response and Defendants have filed a reply. Defendants seek costs in the amount of $1,710.26 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1). Rule 54(d)(1) provides that costs other than attorneys' fees should be allowed to the prevailing party unless the court otherwise directs. “A prevailing party is presumptively entitled to recover all of its costs.” Thompson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 472 F.3d 515, 517 (8th Cir. 2006), quoting, In re Derailment Cases, 417 F.3d 840, 844 (8th Cir.2005). The court may only award such costs as are enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 1920 or “some other statutory authorization.” Smith v. Tenet Healthsystem SL, Inc., 436 F.3d 879, 889 (8th Cir.2006). Taxable costs include: fees for transcripts necessarily obtained for use in the case; costs of copying where copies are necessarily obtained for use in the case; and compensation of court appointed experts and interpreters. 28 U.S.C. § 1920. Defendants’ have submitted documentation of taxable costs in the amount of $1,710.26. The Court finds that these taxable costs are reasonable and supported by sufficient documentation. Accordingly, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is directed to pay to the Defendants $1,710.26 in costs. IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of January, 2013. _________________________________ James M. Moody United States District Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?