Gilmore v. Roane County et al

Filing 382

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Pamela L Reeves on 8/11/20. (JBR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ESTATE OF DUSTIN BARNWELL,
by next of kin, S.C.B., a minor, b/n/f,
SHASTA LASHAY GILMORE,
Plaintiff,
v.
MITCH GRIGSBY, DAVID RANDLE,
RICHARD STOOKSBURY, and ROBERT
COOKER, in their individual capacities,
Defendants.

NO. 3:13-CV-124
REEVES/GUYTON

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Taxation of Costs and Entry of Judgment [D.
379] and Motion for Entry of Judgment [D. 381]. Plaintiff has not responded to either motion.
On October 6, 2017, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss at the conclusion of
Plaintiff’s proof and judgment was entered. [D. 362]. On October 20, 2017, Defendants filed a
bill of costs [D. 363], which the Court stayed pending the resolution of Plaintiff’s motion to alter
or amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) [D. 371]. The matter was
further delayed upon Plaintiff’s appeal of the Court’s denial of her Rule 59(e) motion and the
judgment [D. 374]. The judgment was affirmed [D. 376], and Defendants filed a status report
regarding costs [D. 377]. Defendants then filed a motion for taxation of costs and entry of
judgment [D. 379]. Pursuant to this Court’s local rules and procedures, the Clerk of Court taxed
costs in the amount of $4,934.12 [D. 380]. Defendants again moved for entry of judgment in the
amount of the costs taxed [D. 381].

1
Case 3:13-cv-00124-PLR-HBG Document 382 Filed 08/11/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 10158

Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure directs that costs, other than attorney's
fees should be allowed to the prevailing party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1). The costs that may be
taxed are enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 1920 and may be taxed by a judge or clerk of any court. See
28 U.S.C. § 1920; Crawford Fitting Co. v. J.T. Gibbons, Inc., 482 U.S. 437, 441–42 (1987). In
the Eastern District of Tennessee, the Clerk of Court is charged with assessing these costs after a
Bill of Costs has been properly filed. See E.D. Tenn. L.R. 54.1. When costs are granted under
Rule 54(d)(1), the underlying judgment is generally supplemented to include any unpaid bill of
costs. See 28 U.S.C. § 1920 (“A bill of costs shall be filed in the case and, upon allowance, included
in the judgment or decree.”); see, e.g., Bailey v. United Techs. Corp., No. 3:05-CV-846 (WWE),
2008 WL 11478197, at *2 (D. Conn. June 24, 2008).
Here, the Clerk of Court’s taxation of costs clearly states that “[c]osts are taxed in the
amount of $4,934.12 and included in the judgment.” [D. 363, p. 1 (emphasis added)]. Defendants
represent that those costs remain unpaid, and presumably desire a separate judgment as to costs in
order to pursue a collection effort. A separate judgment does not appear to be strictly necessary.
Nevertheless, “a request for costs raises issues wholly collateral to the judgment in the main cause
of action,” Buchanan v. Stanships, Inc., 485 U.S. 265, 268 (1988), so the Court will enter a separate
judgment as to costs. Defendants’ motions [D. 379, 381] will be GRANTED. An appropriate
order will be entered.

____________________________________________
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2
Case 3:13-cv-00124-PLR-HBG Document 382 Filed 08/11/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 10159