Lockridge v. Per Mar Security & Research Corp
Filing
93
MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Disallowance of Costs 90 is GRANTED. The Cost Judgment entered on December 8, 2014 89 is hereby amended as follows: costs are taxed against Plaintiff, Detrick Lockridge, in the amount of $2,805.32. (Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 3/5/15. (GRR) cc: Detrick Lockridge. Modified text on 3/5/2015 (MMP).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Detrick Lockridge,
Plaintiff,
v.
MEMORANDUM OF LAW &
ORDER
Civil No. 12‐2894 (MJD/JJK)
Per Mar Security & Research Corp.,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
Plaintiff, pro se.
James B. Sherman and Chad A. Staul, Wessels Sherman Joerg Liszka
Laverty Seneczko P.C., Counsel for Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for Disallowance of
Cost Judgment. [Doc. No. 90]
I.
Background
By Order dated September 15, 2014, this Court granted Defendant’s motion
for summary judgment, and directed that judgment be entered in Defendant’s
favor on all of Plaintiff’s claims.
Thereafter, Defendant filed a Bill of Costs with the clerk, seeking payment
of deposition transcript fees used to defend against Plaintiff’s claims totaling
1
$13,095.45. On December 8, 2014, a cost judgment was entered against Plaintiff in
the amount claimed: $13,095.45.
Although Plaintiff did not file an objection to the Bill of Costs prior to the
entry of the cost judgment, Local Rule 54.3(c)(A) provides that within 14 days
after the clerk taxes costs, a party may file and serve a motion and supporting
documents for review of the clerk’s action. Plaintiff filed this motion on
December 22, 2014, therefore the motion is timely.
II.
Discussion
Pursuant to Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, costs, other
than attorney’s fees, may be allowed to the prevailing party. The district court
has substantial discretion in awarding costs to a prevailing party. Greaser v.
State, Dept. of Corrections, 145 F.3d 949, 985 (8th Cir. 1998).
Plaintiff first claims that costs should be disallowed because the case was
closed at the time the cost judgment was entered, and because there is an appeal
pending. These are not proper bases for challenging a cost judgment, however.
The Local Rules for the District of Minnesota provide that a Bill of Costs must be
filed within 30 days after judgment is entered. LR 54.3(c)(1)(A). Filing a notice of
appeal does not affect the time lines set forth in the Local Rules. See Blakley v.
2
Schlumberger Tech. Corp., 648 F.3d 921, 930 (8th Cir. 2011).
Plaintiff also challenges transcript fees for depositions taken in other cases.
Defendant argues that as these depositions were used to defend claims in this
case, the transcript fees are taxable in this case.
The Court recognizes that generally, transcription fees for depositions are
the types of costs permitted by law. Id. (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1920). Here, however,
allowing costs for deposition transcripts procured in a separate case raises a
number of concerns for the Court. The first concern is the possibility that a
defendant could seek double recovery for such fees. On the record before it,
Defendant has not provided the Court any assurance that such costs were not
claimed in other cases.
In addition, a deposition taken in another case will necessarily address
claims that are not present in this case. A prevailing party should not recover
costs for defending against completely separate claims. On this record, the Court
cannot conclude that the entirety of the depositions procured in separate cases
were reasonably necessary this litigation.
Accordingly, the Court has reviewed the Defendant’s Bill of Costs, and will
disallow any amounts claimed for deposition transcripts procured in a case other
3
than this case. Specifically, the Court will disallow costs claimed in Exhibits 2, 3,
4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 ‐ totaling $10,290.13.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Disallowance of Costs
[Doc. No. 90] is GRANTED. The Cost Judgment entered on December 8, 2014
[Doc. No. 89] is hereby amended as follows: costs are taxed against Plaintiff,
Detrick Lockridge, in the amount of $2,805.32.
Date: March 4, 2015
s/ Michael J. Davis
Michael J. Davis
Chief Judge
United States District Court
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?