Brown v. Does

Filing 276

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Pamela Pepper on 8/19/2022 DENYING 274 plaintiff's motion for reconsideration. (cc: all counsel and mailed to Ennis Brown at Wisconsin Secure Program Facility)(cb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
______________________________________________________________________________
ENNIS LEE BROWN,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 16-cv-241-pp
Appeal No. 20-1067

JACOB GENNRICH, MICHAEL HUBER,
and MICHAEL NINKOVIC,
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
(DKT. NO. 274)
______________________________________________________________________________
The plaintiff has filed a motion for reconsideration of the court’s order
granting the defendants’ motion for reimbursement of costs. Dkt. No. 274. He
contends that the court cannot order reimbursement of costs under 28 U.S.C.
§1915(f)(2) because the judgment did not include the payment of costs. Id. at 1.
The plaintiff also states that the defendants’ seven-month delay in seeking
costs was unusual. Id. at 2. The defendants timely filed a bill of costs and the
bill of costs became part of the judgment when approved by the Clerk of Court.
The court will deny the motion.
On September 15, 2021, the court entered judgment for the defendants
following a jury trial. Dkt. No. 257. Fourteen days later, the defendants timely
filed a bill of costs. Dkt. No. 260. See Civil Local Rule 54(a)(1) (E.D. Wis.) (bill of
costs must be filed within fourteen days of judgment). The plaintiff did not
object to the bill of costs. On January 31, 2022, the Clerk of Court filed a bill of
1

costs, taxing costs in the amount of $5,317.19. Dkt. No. 271. Once the period
to protest the costs had passed, the clerk’s taxing of the costs became part of
the judgment. 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.”). The court
subsequently granted the defendants’ motion for reimbursement of costs and
ordered that the agency having custody of the plaintiff collect from his
institution trust account the $5,317.19 amount of the costs by collecting
monthly payments from the account. Dkt. No. 273 at 2. See 28 U.S.C.
§1915(f)(2)(A) (if a judgment against a prisoner includes the payment of costs,
the prisoner shall be required to pay the full amount of the costs ordered).
The plaintiff has not shown that the court erred in ordering the
reimbursement of costs under 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(2).
The court DENIES the plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. Dkt. No.
274.
Dated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 19th day of August, 2022.
BY THE COURT:
________________________________________
HON. PAMELA PEPPER
Chief United States District Judge

2