Hubbell v. FEDEX Smartpost Inc.,

Filing 107

ORDER granting 101 plaintiff's Motion to review Costs (and costs of $10,062.78 are awarded to plaintiff) Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MBea)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

SHERYL HUBBELL,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 14-13897

v.

HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH

FEDEX SMARTPOST, INC.,
Defendant.
______________________________/
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO REVIEW COSTS (Doc. 101)
Plaintiff seeks review of the Clerk’s taxation of costs and an additional
award of non-taxable costs. After a jury trial, Plaintiff prevailed on her
claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Michigan’s ElliottLarsen Civil Rights Act (“ELCRA”). The Clerk taxed $440 in costs, but
denied other requested costs as unsupported or not taxable pursuant to the
local Bill of Costs Handbook. See Docs. 98, 100. In total, Plaintiff seeks
$10,062.78 in costs, including the filing fee and fees for service, transcripts,
witnesses, copies, postage, and parking. See Doc. 101, Exs. 3, 5.
Defendant objects to the award of costs not specifically listed in 28
U.S.C. § 1920, such as fees for parking, postage, office supplies, and
expert witnesses. See 28 U.S.C. § 1920; Hadix v. Johnson, 322 F.3d 895,
-1-

900 (6th Cir. 2003). Under Title VII and the ELCRA, however, the court
may award reasonable out-of-pocket expenses not otherwise taxable under
§ 1920. See M.C.L. § 37.2802; 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–5(k). Under 42 U.S.C.
§ 2000e–5(k), the court may award “a reasonable attorney’s fee ... as part
of the costs.”1 Courts “have construed § 2000e–5(k) as allowing the award
of ‘reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the attorney which are
normally charged to a fee paying client.’” Sturgill v. United Parcel Serv.,
Inc., 512 F.3d 1024, 1036 (8th Cir. 2008) (quoting Mota v. Univ. of Tex.
Houston Health Sci. Ctr., 261 F.3d 512, 529 (5th Cir. 2001)). See also
Lensing v. Potter, 2015 WL 10892073, at *19 (W.D. Mich. Aug. 20, 2015)
(“Courts have awarded telephone expenses, postage, attorney travel
expenses, expenses for facsimiles, and parking, among others under §
2000e-5(k).”); Northcross v. Bd. of Ed. of Memphis City Sch., 611 F.2d 624,
639 (6th Cir. 1979) (“Reasonable photocopying, paralegal expenses, and
travel and telephone costs are thus recoverable pursuant to the statutory
authority of § 1988.”).
Although Defendant generally questions Plaintiff’s support for certain
witness fees, and suggests that Plaintiff is double counting costs, these
objections are not well taken. Upon review of Plaintiff’s request for costs

1

The court previously granted in part Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees. Doc. 92.
-2-

and exhibits, the court finds Plaintiff’s request to be reasonable and
appropriately supported by invoices and receipts. See Doc. 101, Exs. 2, 3,
4, 5. Defendant has not specifically identified any duplicated costs, and the
court discerns none. Plaintiff has listed all costs, except for trial transcripts,
in Exhibit 5. The costs listed in Exhibit 5 total $9,180.78. Plaintiff also
seeks $882 ($813.60 + $68.40) in trial transcripts, for a total of $10,062.78.
Having determined that Defendant’s objections are without merit, and that
Plaintiff may be awarded costs in the form of out-of-pocket expenses, the
court will grant Plaintiff’s motion for costs.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to
review the Clerk’s bill of costs is GRANTED and costs in the amount of
$10,062.78 (which includes the $440 already taxed by the Clerk) are
awarded to Plaintiff.
Dated: January 22, 2019
s/George Caram Steeh
GEORGE CARAM STEEH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on
January 22, 2019, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Marcia Beauchemin
Deputy Clerk

-3-