From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Greenlaw v. Rodney Stinson Post No. 102

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Dec 6, 1989
567 A.2d 75 (Me. 1989)

Opinion

Submitted on Briefs November 2, 1989.

Decided December 6, 1989.

Appeal from the Superior Court, Hancock County, Beaulieu, J.

Barry K. Mills, Hale Hamlin, Ellsworth, for plaintiff.

Edith A. Richardson, Philip D. Buckley, Rudman Winchell, Bangor, for defendant.

Before McKUSICK, C.J., and ROBERTS, WATHEN, GLASSMAN, CLIFFORD, HORNBY and COLLINS, JJ.


The plaintiff, Bruce Greenlaw, appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court (Hancock County, Beaulieu, J.) awarding costs to the defendant, Rodney Stinson Post No. 102 (Post). Greenlaw contends that because the Post did not submit its bill of costs to the court within the 10-day period prescribed by 14 M.R.S.A. § 1502-D (Supp. 1988), the court erred in granting any costs to the Post. We affirm the judgment.

Taxing of costs; hearing

14 M.R.S.A. § 1502-D

Greenlaw brought suit against the Post and other defendants for damages for personal injuries he suffered in a fight following a dance sponsored by the Post. On August 19, 1988, a judgment was entered on a jury verdict for the defendants. On September 8, 1988, the Post filed a bill of costs in the amount of $4,198.68. Pursuant to section 1502-D Greenlaw challenged the Post's bill of costs on the ground that it had not been submitted within 10 days after entry of judgment. After a hearing, the trial court by its order approved the Post's costs in the amount of $2,950 and a judgment was entered accordingly from which Greenlaw appeals.

We have previously stated that the trial court has wide discretion in its determination of the type and amount of costs recoverable by the prevailing party in a civil action. See Teel v. Young, 389 A.2d 322, 324 (Me. 1978). Because there is no sanction specified in section 1502-D for noncompliance with its provisions, we hold that the sanctions, if any, to be imposed for such noncompliance lie within the discretion of the trial court. The party "attacking the propriety of the exercise of discretionary power has an obligation to demonstrate that the court's action constituted an abuse thereof." Higgins v. Higgins, 370 A.2d 670, 674 (Me. 1977). Accordingly, Greenlaw bears the burden of showing that the trial court's action resulted in a "plain and unmistakable injustice" to him. Id. Greenlaw points to no prejudice he suffered as a result of the Post's late filing, nor has he provided this court with a record of the hearing before the trial court on his challenge to the Post's bill of costs. We cannot say on this record that the trial court abused its discretion by approving a portion of the Post's bill of costs.

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.


Summaries of

Greenlaw v. Rodney Stinson Post No. 102

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Dec 6, 1989
567 A.2d 75 (Me. 1989)
Case details for

Greenlaw v. Rodney Stinson Post No. 102

Case Details

Full title:Bruce GREENLAW v. RODNEY STINSON POST NO. 102

Court:Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Date published: Dec 6, 1989

Citations

567 A.2d 75 (Me. 1989)

Citing Cases

Simpson v. Hanover Ins. Co.

We also find no merit in Simpson's contention that the court abused its discretion in reducing as an…

Murphy v. Sentry Ins.

As the prevailing party, the court had discretion to award Sentry its costs. See Chichester, 157 Vt. at 553,…