Sweet Sage Cafe, LLC et al v. Town of North Redington Beach, Florida et al

Filing 104

ORDER granting 103 Motion for Taxation of Costs and directing the Courtroom Deputy Clerk to enter a Bill of Costs in accord with the attached order. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 5/2/2019. (CCB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
SWEET SAGE CAFÉ, LLC,
JOHN MESSMORE, SHERMEE, LLC,
and SS16725, LLC,
Plaintiffs,
v.

CASE NO. 8:18-cv-1080-T-02CPT

TOWN OF NORTH REDINGTON BEACH,
FLORIDA, and SHERIFF BOB GUALTIERI,
in his official capacity as Pinellas County Sheriff,
Defendants.
/
ORDER ON COSTS
This cause comes before the Court on the Proposed Bill of Costs (Dkt. 102)
and Defendant Sheriff Bob Gaulieri’s Motion to Tax Costs (Dkt. 103).1 After
careful consideration of the proposed bill of costs, the applicable law, and the
entire file, the Court concludes the motion should be granted.
TIMELINESS
Before reaching the itemized costs, the Court addresses the issue of
timeliness. Summary judgment was granted in Defendant Sheriff Gualtieri’s
1

According to the Rule 3.01(g) certification, the amount of costs is unopposed.
Dkt. 103 at 2. Counsel notes that Plaintiffs voiced an objection on the ground that
awarding costs is premature. Plaintiffs have filed no response, and the time for filing one
has passed.

favor. Dkt. 98. The Clerk entered a final judgment as to the sheriff on April 1,
2019. Dkt. 99. The sheriff filed a proposed bill of costs four days later. Dkt. 102.
The case is still proceeding against the town of North Redington Beach.
“A bill of costs shall be filed in the case and, upon allowance, included in
the judgment or decree.” 28 U.S.C. § 1920.2 Although there is no time limit
specified in Rule 54(d)(1) for filing a motion to tax costs, Local Rule 4.18 of the
Middle District provides that by separate motion all claims for costs must be filed
“not later than fourteen (14) days following the entry of judgment.” See Abdullah
v. Osceola Cty. Sheriff, No. 6:14-cv-629-Orl -40TBS, 2015 WL 12859334, at *1
(M.D. Fla. Dec. 1, 2015); Giminez v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co., No. 8:08-cv-2495-T24TGW, 2009 WL 3048563, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 21, 2009). Sheriff Gualtieri
complied with the statute and rules. That the case proceeds against the town does
not prevent a bill of costs from being entered.
COSTS
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

2

“Defendant must wait until the Clerk enters a final judgment and then file a bill
of costs.” Fowler by Fowler v. Jefferson Nat’l Life Ins. Co., No. 4:08-cv-148-HLM, 2009
WL 10668900, at *1 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 15, 2009).
-2-

printed or electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained for use in the
case.” 42 U.S.C. § 1920(2). The prevailing party may also recover fees for
printing and “costs of making copies of any materials where the copies are
necessarily obtained for use in the case.” 28 U.S.C. § 1920 (3), (4).
Depositions
Defendant Sheriff Gaultieri as the prevailing party seeks the costs of
purchasing eight original depositions. All eight of the depositions were noticed by
Plaintiff and the sheriff’s co-defendant, the town. Dkt. 102 at 1; Dkt. 102-1 at 530.
It is not necessary that deposition testimony be used at summary judgment
to recover the costs of the transcripts. In re Fundamental Long Term Care, Inc.,
753 F. App’x 878, 882 (11th Cir. 2019) (citing EEOC v. W & O, Inc., 213 F.3d
600, 622 (11th Cir. 2000)). Nor is it required that the transcripts “be cited in the
dispositive order.” In re Fundamental, 753 F. App’x at 882. Even if the
depositions may have been “minimal” or “not critical” to the prevailing party’s
ultimate success, recovery for those costs is permitted. W & O, Inc., 213 F.3d at
621. The test is whether any portions of the depositions were “related to an issue
which was present in the case at the time the deposition was taken.” Id. (quoting
Indep. Tube Corp. v. Copperweld Corp., 543 F. Supp. 706, 718 (N.D. Ill. 1982)).
-3-

The Court finds that at the time they were taken, the depositions related to
issues in this case. The costs of all eight depositions are therefore awarded.
Printing and Copying
Defendant seeks the costs of printing and making copies of 4,580 page at
15¢ per page.3 The $687.00 of copies are attributable to discovery documents that
required copying for a privilege review and redaction, a lengthy privilege log,
courtesy copies required by chambers, and copies of the court file for required
storage. Dkt. 102-1 at 2, 31-32.
“Copies attributable to discovery, copies of pleadings, correspondence,
documents tendered to opposing party, copies of exhibits and documents prepared
for the Court’s consideration are recoverable.” Brown v. Lassiter-Ware, Inc., No.
6:11-cv-1074-Orl-36DAB, 2014 WL 5258912, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 15, 2014)
(citation omitted). Copies made merely for the convenience of counsel, however,
are not recoverable. Health First, Inc. v. Hynes, No. 6:11-cv-715-Orl-41KRS,
2015 WL 12977509, at *7 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 5, 2015) (citations omitted). To

3

The price per copy has been found to be reasonable. See, e.g., Albakri v. Sheriff
of Orange Cty., No. 6:15-cv-1969-Orl-31GJK, 2017 WL 4159819, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Sept.
13, 2017), report and recommendation adopted in 2017 WL 4124820 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 18,
2017) (noting that reasonable market rate in Middle District of Florida runs from 10 to
15¢, and citing Perkins v. Tolen, No. 3:10-cv-851-J-37EM, 2012 WL 3244512, at *3
(M.D. Fla. July 13, 2012)).
-4-

determine whether the copies were necessarily obtained for use in the case, the
standard is “whether the prevailing party could have reasonably believed that it
was necessary to copy the papers” at the time of copying. W & O, Inc., 213 F.3d at
623; Hynes, 2015 WL 12977509, at *7.
The Court finds that at the time the copies were made, Defendants
reasonably believed it was necessary to copy them. The copies were necessarily
obtained for use in the case.
Accordingly, Defendant Sheriff Gualtieri is awarded costs in the total
amount of $3,495.20. The Courtroom Deputy Clerk is directed to enter a Bill of
Costs in his favor.
DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, on May 2, 2019.

s/William F. Jung
WILLIAM F. JUNG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

COPIES FURNISHED TO:

Counsel of Record

-5-