Brooks v. Healthcare IQ, Inc.

Filing 56

ORDER granting 55 Motion for Taxation of Costs. Costs taxed in the amount of $ $4,390.70 against Plaintiff. The Courtroom Deputy Clerk is directed to enter a Bill of Costs in accord with the attached order. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 3/27/2019. (CCB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
DERRICK BROOKS,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. 8:17-cv-1897-T-02JSS

HEALTHCARE-IQ, INC.,
Defendant.
/
ORDER ON COSTS
This cause comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Taxation of
Costs and Attached Bill of Costs (Dkt. 55). No objections have been filed. After
careful consideration of the proposed Bill of Costs, the applicable law, and the
entire file, the Court concludes the motion should be granted.
Costs other than attorneys’ fees “should be allowed to the prevailing party”
unless a federal statute, the federal rules, or court order provides otherwise. Fed. R.
Civ. P. 54(d)(1). The prevailing party may recover the costs of “[f]ees for printed or
electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained for use in the case.” 42
U.S.C. § 1920(2). Although § 1920 does not specifically allow court reporter
appearance fees, several courts in this District have permitted the recovery when the
deposition is “necessarily obtained.” See Brazill v. Miners, No. 8:14-cv-3131-T27TGW, 2018 WL 1609960, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 3, 2018) (citing cases both for

and against awarding costs for court reporter appearance fees); Frost v. McNeilus,
No. 8:14-cv-81-T-24MAP, 2015 WL 1730244, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 14, 2015)
(citing authority for awarding costs for same); Gleason v. Roche Labs., Inc., No.
3:08-cv-1172-J-20JRK, 2011 WL 6076526, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 6, 2011) (citing
cases both for and against awarding costs for same).1 Likewise, costs of expedited
transcripts may be allowed if expediting them was necessary “under the
circumstances to meet court deadlines.” Chico’s FAS, Inc. v. Clair, No. 2:13-cv792-FtM-38MRM, 2018 WL 1833134, at *9 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 25, 2018) (citing Maris
Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 302 F.3d 1207, 1225-26 (11th Cir. 2002)).2
Defendant as the prevailing party seeks court reporter hourly appearance fees
and the costs of expedited deposition transcripts for two depositions – Plaintiff
Derrick Brooks and Michele Massimino. Both of these depositions were heavily
relied on in Defendant’s successful motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 43), and
the Court’s order granting the summary judgment cites extensively to both
1

See also Chico’s FAS, Inc. v. Clair, No. 2:13-cv-792-FtM-38MRM, 2018 WL
1833134 at *9 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 25, 2018) (citing cases both for and against awarding costs
for same); S.G. by and through S.M.G. v. Walt Disney Parks & Resorts US, Inc., No. 6:14cv-1899-Orl-22GJK2017 WL 3065212, at *10 (M.D. Fla. July 19, 2017) (citing cases for
awarding costs for same); Universal Physician Servs., LLC v. Zotto, No. 8:16-cv-1274-T26JSS, 2017 WL 2560024, at *4 (M.D. Fla. May 24, 2017) (same).
2

See also Mims/Alafia, LLC v. Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC, No. 8:05-cv-2271-T26EAJ, 2007 WL 9723778, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 20, 2007) (awarding deposition transcript
costs at regular page rate because prevailing party failed to explain why depositions at issue
were expedited).
-2-

depositions in reaching its decision. Dkt. 53. As such, both depositions were
“necessarily obtained for use” in the case.
Not only were both depositions “necessarily obtained,” but Defendant has
shown that at the time the expedited copy of Massimino’s deposition was ordered,
Defendant reasonably believed it was necessary to do so to timely file its motion for
summary judgment. Defendant has also shown that Plaintiff’s deposition was
ordered on an expedited basis to meet the short response deadline to a motion to
compel. The Court finds recovery for the expedited transcripts is warranted. See
Kearney v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., No. 8:06-cv-595-T-24TGW, 2010 WL 1856060,
at *2 (M.D. Fla. May 10, 2010) (permitting expedited transcript costs to meet court
deadline).
Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion for Taxation of Costs (Dkt. 55) is granted.
Defendant is awarded costs in the amount of $ 4,390.70. The Courtroom Deputy
Clerk is directed to enter a Bill of Costs in favor of Defendant.
DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, on March 27, 2019.

s/William F. Jung
WILLIAM F. JUNG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
COPIES FURNISHED TO:

Counsel of Record

-3-