Thomas v. Viskase Corporation

Filing 67

ORDER: Viskase's opposed request for $1469.20 in deposition-related expenses, 59 , is denied. The Court appreciates Thomas's updated IFP form, 66 . She remains entitled to IFP status. Viskase prevailed, which creates a presumptive entitlement to costs. But, Thomas's financial situation weighs against any award. The Court declines to tax costs in these circumstances. Signed by Chief Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/11/2022. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION JAMIE THOMAS v. PLAINTIFF No. 3:19-cv-371-DPM VISKASE COMPANIES, INC. DEFENDANT ORDER Viskase's opposed request for $1469.20 1n deposition-related expenses, Doc. 59, is denied. The Court appreciates Thomas's updated IFP form, Doc. 66. (The Court directs the Clerk to clear the gavel on that document). She remains entitled to IFP status. Viskase prevailed, which creates a presumptive entitlement to costs. Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp., 309 F.3d 494, 498 (8th Cir. 2002). But, Thomas' s financial situation weighs against any award. Cross v. General Motor Corp., 721 F.2d 1152, 1157 (8th Cir. 1983). The Court declines to tax costs in these circumstances. Poe v. John Deere Company, 695 F.2d 1103, 1108 (8th Cir. 1982). So Ordered. I D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge

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?