Hunt v. Reyes et al
Filing
190
ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 04/23/15 ORDERING that defendant's 180 Application to Tax Costs is DENIED. (Benson, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MICHAEL A. HUNT,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:08-cv-00181-MCE-CKD (PC)
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
M. REYES, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
In bringing this lawsuit, Plaintiff Michael A. Hunt, an inmate in the custody of the
18
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, alleged that he was retaliated
19
against for exercising his First Amendment right to file grievances and pursue civil rights
20
litigation pertaining to his incarceration. Specifically, Plaintiff claims that Defendant
21
David Rios placed false documentation about Plaintiff in his central file after Plaintiff filed
22
a grievance, and because Defendant Rios learned that Plaintiff had filed a prior lawsuit.
23
On January 7, 2015, this Court entered judgment in Defendant Rios’ favor
24
following a jury verdict for the defense. Defendant Rios subsequently filed a Bill of Costs
25
in the amount of $980.10. The propriety of that costs bill is presently before the Court.
26
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) creates a presumption in favor of awarding
27
costs to the prevailing party, “but vests in the district court discretion to refuse to award
28
costs.” Ass’n of Mexican-American Educators v. State of Cal., 231 F.3d 572, 591
1
1
(9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). The imposition of considerable costs against a prisoner in a
2
case of this nature could have an undesired chilling effect on civil rights litigation in an
3
important area (see, e.g., Stanley v. Univ. of Southern Cal., 178 F.3d 1069, 1080
4
(9th Cir. 1999)), and the Court therefore exercises its discretion to disallow costs herein.
5
Defendant’s Application to Tax Costs (ECF No. 180) is accordingly DENIED.
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 23, 2015
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?