Tucker v. Entergy Arkansas Inc
ORDER re 20 Bill of Costs filed by Entergy Arkansas Inc, Entergy shall be awarded costs in the amount of $1,371.72. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 7/25/11. (vjt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
ENTERGY ARKANSAS, INC.,
Angela Tucker, a white female, brought this action against her employer, Entergy
Arkansas, Inc. (Entergy), alleging race and sex discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. Entergy moved for summary judgment
and this Court, by Memorandum and Order dated June 1, 2011 [doc.#18] granted Entergy’s
motion for summary judgment and entered judgment dismissing this action. Tucker did not
Now before the Court is Entergy’s Bill of Costs [doc.#20] seeking reimbursement in the
total amount of $1,371.72 for the following expenses it states were necessarily incurred in the
defense of this action: $1,215.10 for fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts; and
$156.62 for fees and disbursements for printing. Tucker has not responded in opposition to
Entergy’s Bill of Costs. Having considered the matter, the Court finds that Entergy’s Bill of
Costs should be and hereby is approved as submitted.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, a judge or court clerk “may tax as costs” fees of the clerk and
marshal, fees of the court reporter, fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses, fees for
copies of necessary papers, docket fees, and compensation of court-appointed experts and
interpreters. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1), “costs other than attorneys’ fees shall be allowed as
of course to the prevailing party unless the court otherwise directs.” Brisco-Wade v. Carnahan,
297 F.3d 781, 782 (8th Cir. 2002). See also Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp., 309 F.3d
494, 498 (8th Cir. 2002) (noting that when an expense, such as necessary photocopies, is taxable
as a cost, “there is a strong presumption that a prevailing party shall recover it ‘in full
measure’”). “The ‘losing party bears the burden of making the showing that an award is
inequitable under the circumstances.’” Id. See also 168th and Dodge, LP v. Rave Reviews
Cinemas, LLC, 501 F.3d 945, 958 (8th Cir. 2007) (a prevailing party is presumptively entitled to
recover all of its costs and the losing party bears the burden of overcoming the presumption that
the prevailing party is entitled to costs, meaning that the losing party must suggest a rationale
under which the district court’s actions constitute an abuse of discretion).
Tucker has not argued or otherwise met her burden of showing that the award of costs
sought by Entergy is inequitable under the circumstances or that this Court’s actions constitute
an abuse of discretion.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Entergy be awarded $1,215.10 for fees for printed
or electronically recorded transcripts and $156.62 for fees and disbursements for printing, for a
total of $1,371.72.
Dated this 25th day of July 2011.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
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?