Day v. Inland Management Corporation et al

Filing 175

MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Sharon Johnson Coleman on 8/12/2014:Mailed notice(rth, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
STEPHANIE DAY,
Plaintiff,
v.
INLAND SBA MANAGEMENT
CORPORATION, an Illinois corporation, and
SOMERCOR 504, INC., an Illinois corporation,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 11 cv 6201
Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On September 18, 2013, this Court entered judgment in favor of defendants Inland SBA
Management Corporation (“Inland”) and SomerCor 504, Inc. (“SomerCor”). Plaintiff, Stephanie
Day, subsequently moved for reconsideration, which was denied. This matter is now before the
Court on defendants’ motions for bill of costs, seeking $22,644.93 total. Day objects to each
defendants’ bills of costs and requests the Court to either deny defendants’ bills of costs or
significantly reduce Day’s obligation to pay costs.
Legal Standard
Rule 54(d) provides that “costs other than attorney’s fees shall be allowed as of course to
the prevailing party unless the court otherwise directs.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d). The Rule “provides a
presumption that the losing party will pay costs but grants the court discretion to direct
otherwise.” Rivera v. City of Chicago, 469 F.3d 631, 634 (7th Cir. 2006). The prevailing party is
entitled to costs unless the opposing party overcomes the presumption. McGill v. Faulkner, 18
F.3d 456, 459 (7th Cir. 1994). A prevailing party may recover: (1) fees of the clerk and marshal;
(2) fees of the court reporter for all or any part of the stenographic transcript necessarily obtained
for use in the case; (3) fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses; (4) fees for
exemplification and copies of papers necessarily obtained for use in the case; (5) docket fees
under section 1923; (6) compensation of court-appointed experts, compensation of interpreters,
and salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of special interpretation services under section 1928. 28
U.S.C. §1920.
Courts use a two-step approach to determine whether to award costs. To be recoverable,
costs must fall under one of the statutory categories of §1920 and be both reasonable and
1

necessary to the litigation. Cefalu v. Village of Elk Village, 211 F.3d 416, 427 (7th Cir. 2000).
The party seeking an award of costs carries the burden of showing that the requested costs were
necessarily incurred and reasonable. Trs. of the Chi. Plastering Pension Trust v. Cork Plastering,
Co., 570 F.3d 890, 904–905 (7th Cir. 2008). Costs incurred merely for the convenience of the
prevailing party may not be recovered. Barber v. Ruth, 7 F.3d 636, 645 (7th Cir. 1993).
Transcript Costs
Inland seeks to recover $4,273.45 in transcript costs for the following depositions:
Stephanie Day (plaintiff), Crystal Howard, Howard Jaffe, Milan Maslic, Gabriel Beukinga,
Tanya Herbert, Mary Cvengros, David Frank, and Nora O’Connor. (Dkt. #172-1, Inland Bill of
Costs.) The costs associated with deposition transcripts and copies are recoverable where such
costs are “necessarily obtained” for use in the case. See 28 U.S.C. § 1920(2), (4). The
determination of necessity must be made in light of the facts known at the time of the deposition.
Mother & Father v. Cassidy, 338 F.3d 704, 712 (7th Cir. 2003). Day objects to Inland’s
transcript costs arguing Inland fails to show the costs incurred were necessary and further fails to
substantiate its costs with proper documentation, such as page length, cost per page, receipts or
invoices. Indeed, aside from identifying the person deposed and the amount taxed, Inland
provides no documentation to the Court in support of its transcript costs. Accordingly, Day’s
objection is sustained and these costs are denied.
SomerCor seeks to recover $6,236.70 for the same deposition transcripts. (Dkt. #158,
SomerCor Bill of Costs.) In support, SomerCor attaches invoices for all transcript costs it seeks
to recover, including court reporter fees, number of transcript pages and cost per page for each
transcript. (Dkt. #158-1, SomerCor Itemization of Bill of Costs; #158-2, SomerCor Invoices.)
Day objects to the cost per page assessed to Day’s deposition as SomerCor ordered a copy of the
transcript, not the original. Local Rule 54.1(b) provides for recovery of the transcript at a cost not
to exceed “the regular copy rate as established by the Judicial Conference of the United States
and in effect at the time the transcript or deposition was filed unless some other rate was
previously provided for by order of court.” Pursuant to the rate set by the Judicial Conference,
SomerCor is entitled to $0.90 per page for transcript copies. Accordingly, Day’s objection is
sustained and the Court will deduct $881.50 from SomerCor’s bill of costs.
Day also objects to transcript costs relating to Crystal Howard’s deposition and argues
the deposition was not reasonably necessary to the case at the time it was taken. SomerCor states
2

that Howard’s deposition was also used in Howard v. Inland SBA Management Corporation,
Case No. 11-cv-7905, and only seeks to recover costs for the 130 pages of transcript relating to
the instant case. The Court notes that Howard is referenced in Day’s amended complaint, as well
as briefs filed in support of and in opposition to SomerCor’s motion for summary judgment and
this Court’s Opinion and Order granting SomerCor’s motion. As such, the Court finds that
Howard’s deposition was reasonably necessary to the case at the time it was taken and overrules
Day’s objection.
Printing Costs
Inland seeks to recover $2,720.07 of printing costs. A prevailing party may recover costs
for copies that were “necessary for use in the case.” 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4). While a prevailing
party is not required to provide a detailed explanation for the necessity of each page copied, it is
required to provide the best breakdown of copying costs from retained records. Trading Tech.
Int'l, Inc. v. eSpeed, Inc., 750 F.Supp.2d 962, 979 (N.D.Ill. 2010) (citing Northbrook Excess &
Surplus Ins. Co. v. Procter & Gamble Co., 924 F.2d 633, 644 (7th Cir.1991)). Here, Inland again
fails to submit any invoices or receipts in support of its costs, but lists only “outside
photocopies” and “1/2 the cost for document conversion, labeling and duplication” as its printing
costs. (Dkt. #172-1.) Day objects to these costs and argues that Inland’s substantiation
completely fails to show that the costs were necessarily obtained for use in the case.
Accordingly, the Court denies Inland’s copying costs.
SomerCor seeks to recover $9,414.71 of printing and copying costs, and attaches invoices
from Strategic Document Solutions, Inc. as well as receipts from Fed Ex Printing & Copying.
(Dkt. #158-1; #158-2, pp. 11-18.) Day contends that because the costs are described only as
“legal copies,” “bates label copies,” and “copying costs” the only reasonable inference is that the
copies were made solely for attorney convenience and thus not recoverable. The Court
acknowledges that SomerCor incurred printing and copying costs during the course of this
litigation which were likely necessary for use in the case. However, the Court finds SomerCor’s
submissions are insufficient documentation of costs and do not provide the Court with the
information necessary to determine whether the costs were necessary or were made for the sake
of convenience. Where the prevailing party has failed to provide sufficient information, courts in
this district have either reduced copying costs by a substantial percentage or denied copying
costs entirely. See e.g., Trading Tech., 750 F.Supp.2d at 979. The Court finds that a 50 percent
3

reduction in printing costs is appropriate given that SomerCor’s submissions, though lacking in
detail, show that it incurred substantial copying costs. Accordingly, the Court awards SomerCor
$4,707.36 for printing costs.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated herein, the Court grants in part and denies in part Inland’s and
SomerCor’s Bill of Costs. Day’s objections are sustained in part and overruled in part. Inland’s
bill of costs is denied in its entirety. SomerCor is awarded $5,355.20 in transcript costs and
$4,707.36 printing costs.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
___________________
Date: August 12, 2014
____________________________
Sharon Johnson Coleman
United States District Judge

4