Demarest v. The City of Vallejo California et al
Filing
85
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 5/29/2020 DENYING Defendants' 75 Request for Bill of Costs. No costs will be taxed in this action.(Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DAVID P. DEMAREST,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:16-cv-02271-MCE-KJN
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
CITY OF VALLEJO CALIFORNIA,
et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
By way of this action, Plaintiff David P. Demarest (“Plaintiff”) sought to recover for
18
constitutional violations arising from his arrest at a sobriety checkpoint run by Defendant
19
City of Vallejo (the “City”). The gist of Plaintiff’s remaining claims against the City and
20
co-Defendant Officer Jodi Brown (“Officer Brown”) (collectively “Defendants”) was that
21
requiring Plaintiff to present his driver’s license at the checkpoint constituted an
22
unreasonable search and that Officer Brown used excessive force in effectuating his
23
subsequent arrest. The Court granted summary judgment in Defendants’ favor. ECF
24
No. 73. Presently before the Court is Defendants’ subsequent Bill of Costs (“BOC”).
25
ECF No. 75.
26
Plaintiff objects to the taxing of costs because the BOC is unsupported by
27
documentation and because awarding costs would have a chilling effect on civil rights
28
case. The Court agrees that Defendants’ failure to support their cost request is fatal.
1
1
Indeed, Local Rule 292(b) provides:
2
Within fourteen (14) days after entry of judgment or order
under which costs may be claimed, the prevailing party may
serve on all other parties and file a bill of costs conforming to
28 U.S.C. § 1924. The cost bill shall itemize the costs claimed
and shall be supported by a memorandum of costs and an
affidavit of counsel that the costs claimed are allowable by law,
are correctly stated, and were necessarily incurred. Cost bill
forms shall be available from the Clerk upon request or on the
Court's website.
3
4
5
6
7
Defendants’ filing does not include the requisite supporting evidence itemizing
8
costs such that the Court can determine whether they were in fact appropriate.1 Having
9
failed to adhere to the applicable rules, Defendants’ request is DENIED. No costs will be
10
11
12
taxed in this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 29, 2020
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Defendants did thereafter file a “Response” containing numerous pages of supporting evidence
for their claims, but that was too little, too late.
1
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?