Harrison v. SSM Audrain Health Care, Inc

Filing 71

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant SSM Audrain Healthcare, Inc.'s Bill of Costs is GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. Defendant cannot recover the costs of videography, $965.00, or shipping and handling of the written transcripts in the amount of $79.00. All other costs are taxable. Plaintiff is taxed in the amount of $1,912.50. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on April 9, 2019. (MCB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
NORTHERN DIVISION
MARY J. HARRISON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SSM AUDRAIN HEALTHCARE, INC.,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:17-CV-00014-ERW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant SSM Audrain Healthcare, Inc.’s Bill of
Costs [68].
BACKGROUND
On March 10, 2017, Plaintiff Mary J. Harrison (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against
SSM Audrain Healthcare, Inc. (“Defendant”) for alleged age discrimination. ECF No. 1. On,
January 4, 2019, this Court granted Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgement [ECF No. 59]
on all remaining claims. Defendant filed a motion for a bill of costs to which Plaintiff has
objected.
BILL OF COSTS STANDARD
A district court has broad discretion over awarding of costs to a prevailing party. Blakley
v. Schlumberger Technology Corp., 648 F.3d 921, 930 (8th Cir. 2011) (citation omitted). Before
any bill of costs is taxed, the party claiming any item of cost or disbursement must attach an
affidavit, having knowledge of the facts, that such item is correct and has been necessarily
incurred in the case and that services for which fees have been charged were actually and
necessarily preformed. 28 U.S.C. §1924. Costs which may be taxed include:

1

(1) Fees of the clerk and marshal;
(2) Fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained for
use in the case;
(3) Fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses;
(4) Fees for exemplification and the costs of making copies of any materials
where the copies are necessarily obtained for use in the case;
(5) Docket fees under section 1923 of [Title 28 U.S.C.];
(6) Compensation of court appointed experts, compensation of interpreters, and
salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of special interpretation services under section
1828 of [Title 28 U.S.C.].
28 U.S.C. §1920. The losing party bears the burden of overcoming the presumption the
prevailing party is entitled to recover all costs covered by §1920. Stanley v. Cottrell, Inc., 784
F.3d 454, 464 (8th Cir. 2015).
DISCUSSION
Defendant’s Bill of Costs lists three items: (1) court reporter written transcript services
for Plaintiff’s November 30, 2017 deposition in the amount of $1,967.25; (2) videographer
services for Plaintiff’s November 30, 2017 deposition in the amount of $965.00; and (3) copies
of records from the Missouri Department of Labor in the amount of $24.25. The Court will
address the items as follows:
A.

Transcript and Video Recording Fees for Plaintiff’s Deposition
Plaintiff opposes Defendant’s request for fees relating to written deposition transcripts

and videography of the same deposition. The recovery of costs for both printed and
electronically recorded transcripts of the same deposition is permissible, as long as each
transcript was necessarily obtained for use in the case. Stanley, 784 F.3d at 465 (citations
omitted). While courts have found it permissible for both printed and electronically recorded
deposition fees to be assessed for the same deposition, the circumstances surrounding the fees
determine whether they are necessarily obtained for use in the case. See Id. at 466-67. The
complaint, in the present case, does not reasonably create the likelihood of complexity, or other
2

factors, making it necessary to have both the written transcript and video of Plaintiff’s
deposition. As such, this Court will tax Plaintiff for only the transcript of the deposition on
November 30, 2017, and not for videography services of the same event.
B.

Postage and Delivery Expenses
Section 1920 does not authorize taxing for postage and delivery expenses. Smith v. Tenet

Health System SL, Inc., 436 F.3d 879, 889 (8th Cir. 2006) (citations omitted). As such,
Defendant’s Bill of Cost line item in the amount of $1,967.25 for written transcription services
relating to Plaintiff’s November 30, 2017 deposition will be reduced by $79.00, the amount
billed for shipping and handling. See Exhibit A, ECF No. 69. The Court will tax Plaintiff the
remainder of the cost in the sum of $1,888.25.
C.

Missouri Department of Labor Records
Defendant’s costs to obtain relevant Missouri Department of Labor records were

reasonable and necessarily obtained for use in the case. Labor records are clearly reasonable and
necessary where Plaintiff has put an employment action at issue in the complaint. Therefore, the
Court finds Defendant’s cost of $24.25 for Missouri Department of Labor records to be taxable.
D.

Conclusion
In conclusion, Defendant cannot show it was reasonable and necessary to have both

written transcripts and video recordings of Plaintiff’s deposition; thus, only costs for the written
transcript will be taxed. Further, shipping and handling costs for the written transcript are not
taxable by this Court and will be removed from the total cost, leaving $1,888.25 remaining.
Lastly, Defendant’s costs obtaining copies of Missouri Department of Labor records are
reasonable and relevant in this case where Plaintiff has put an employment action at issue;
Defendant’s cost of $24.25 will be taxed. Thus, the total cost taxable to Plaintiff is $1,912.50.

3

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant SSM Audrain Healthcare, Inc.’s Bill of
Costs is GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. Defendant cannot recover the costs of
videography, $965.00, or shipping and handling of the written transcripts in the amount of $79.00.
All other costs are taxable. Plaintiff is taxed in the amount of $1,912.50.
So Ordered this 9th day of April, 2019.

E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4