Radmer v. OS Salesco, Inc.

Filing 43

ORDER denying 39 Plaintiff's Motion for Review of Taxation of Costs (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Ann D. Montgomery on 03/27/2017. (TLU)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Michael J. Radmer, Jr.,
Plaintiff,
ORDER
Civil No. 15-3177 ADM/BRT

v.
OS Salesco, Inc.,

Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
Phillip Gainsley, Esq., Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Plaintiff.
Ellen A. Brinkman, Esq., Briggs & Morgan, PA, Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
Michael J. Radmer, Jr. (“Radmer”) sued his former employer, alleging that he was
sexually harassed and assaulted by his co-worker, direct supervisor, and former girlfriend.
Radmer’s suit was dismissed at summary judgment, and OS Salesco, Inc. (“Omaha Steaks”)
claimed $5,877.37 in taxable costs as the prevailing party under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
54(d)(1). See Bill of Costs [Docket No. 33]. Radmer Objected [Docket No. 34], and the Clerk
of Court entered judgment for $4,788.75, subtracting $1,088.62 in nontaxable clerk and copy
fees. See Cost J. [Docket No. 38].
Radmer has filed a Motion for Review of Taxation of Costs [Docket No. 39]. Radmer
argues that he should not be taxed for costs because of the disparity between his financial status
and that of Omaha Steaks, a multi-national corporation with annual sales that exceed $400
million.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) provides in relevant part: “Unless a federal
statute, these rules, or a court order provides otherwise, costs—other than attorney’s
fees—should be allowed to the prevailing party.” Although the district court has discretion in

awarding costs, “the Rules presume that the prevailing party is entitled to costs.” Lochridge v.
Lindsey Mgmt. Co., 824 F.3d 780, 783 (8th Cir. 2016) (quoting Reger v. Nemours Found., Inc.,
599 F.3d 285, 289 (3d Cir. 2010)).
Radmer cannot overcome the presumption of awarding costs in favor of Omaha Steaks.
While Radmer’s current personal financial situation may be dire, Radmer’s claim of indigence is
undercut by the financial assistance he receives from his parents, who “pay most of [his]
expenses,” including the “significant costs of this litigation.” Radmer Decl. [Docket No. 40] ¶ 6.
The financial imbalance of Radmer and Omaha Steaks also does not displace the presumption of
awarding costs to Omaha Steaks. See In re Derailment Cases, 417 F.3d 840, 845 (8th Cir. 2005)
(citing cases where costs were awarded to “federal law enforcement agents and against indigent
prisoners” and to a “major corporation and against individual plaintiff of ‘limited financial
resources.’”).
Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Michael J. Radmer, Jr.s’ Motion for Review of Taxation of
Costs [Docket No. 39] is DENIED.
BY THE COURT:

s/Ann D. Montgomery
ANN D. MONTGOMERY
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: March 27, 2017.

2