Conway et al v. Licata et al

Filing 373

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. Because the Defendants are not a prevailing party the 369 Bill of Costs is DENIED. (Montes, Mariliz)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
____________________________________
)
ANDREW CONWAY, et al.,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
Civil Action No. 13-12193-LTS
)
SAM LICATA, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ BILL OF COSTS (Doc. No. 369)
November 18, 2015
SOROKIN, J.
The Defendants in this matter have submitted a bill of costs seeking reimbursement for
transcripts, witness expenses, and photocopies. Doc. No. 369. The Plaintiffs oppose the bill of
costs in its entirety, arguing primarily that the Defendants are not entitled to costs because they
are not a “prevailing party” under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d). Doc. No. 371. The Court agrees, and
concludes that even though the Defendants prevailed on certain claims, the Plaintiffs are the
prevailing party in this case and the Defendants are not a prevailing party entitled to costs. As
the First Circuit has held, this Court has broad discretion to award or deny costs in a case that
yielded mixed results, and “a mixed result does not preclude the trial court from awarding costs
to the party whom it reasonably determines carried the day.” See Ira Green, Inc. v. Military
Sales & Serv. Co., 775 F.3d 12, 28-29 (1st Cir. 2014). In light of the jury’s verdict and the
Court’s resolution of the other claims at issue, the Court concludes that the Plaintiffs, rather than
the Defendants, “carried the day” in this litigation.
1

Because the Defendants are not a prevailing party, their bill of costs is DENIED. Doc.
No. 369.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Leo T. Sorokin
Leo T. Sorokin
United States District Judge

2