Johnson v. Chevron Corporation et al

Filing 378

ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO BILL OF COSTS (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/10/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. CHEVRON CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. / SAMUEL B JOHNSON III, Plaintiff, No. C 07-5756 SI ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO BILL OF COSTS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Defendants' bill of costs totals $20,856.14, and plaintiff has filed several objections. [Docket No. 361] Generally, plaintiff argues that he cannot afford to pay this sum because his annual salary is $55,428 and he supports two children, and that under Stanley v. Univ. of S. Cal., 178 F.3d 1069, 1079 (9th Cir. 1999) imposing costs in this amount would have a chilling effect on future civil rights litigants. He also raises several specific objections to several items on the bill of costs: $5,482.60 in copying costs, $85.12 in delivery fees, $2,679.50 in fees for subpoenas of plaintiff's medical and employment records, and $334.35 in deposition transcript costs. The Court finds that, under all of the circumstances of this litigation, this case does not raise any of the concerns articulated in Stanley concerning chilling future civil rights litigants. In addition, plaintiff chose to litigate this action in a manner which created administrative burdens. The costs incurred are due in no small part to strategic choices plaintiff made, such as naming multiple defendants and bringing a wide range of issues into the case. Plaintiff is not indigent and has not shown that he is unable to pay these costs. Plaintiff has also failed to show good cause for reducing any of the specific costs defendants seek. Defendants' 10 cent/page charge for copying is not excessive. The other costs were necessary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 expenditures made by defendants in the course of litigation. Plaintiff's objections are OVERRULED. The parties may discuss a payment plan and/or deferral pending appeal. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 10, 2009 SUSAN ILLSTON 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?