From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Shasta Services Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 22, 2007
No. 2:04-cv-01955-MCE-PAN (E.D. Cal. May. 22, 2007)

Opinion

No. 2:04-cv-01955-MCE-PAN.

May 22, 2007


ORDER


Defendant Shasta Services Inc. dba Timberworks ("Timberworks") as the prevailing party in this litigation, has filed a Bill of Costs, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920, in the amount of $4,902.97. Qui Tam Plaintiff Mike Stierli ("Plaintiff") has objected to certain portions of that costs bill.

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d), the prevailing party in a lawsuit may recover its costs "unless the court otherwise directs". As this language suggests, the ultimate decision on whether to award costs is a matter within the court's discretion. Association of Mexican-American Educators v. State of Calif., 231 F.3d 572, 591-92 (9th Cir. 2000). If the court declines to award costs as requested by the prevailing party, however, it should specify its reasons for doing so. Berkla v. Corel Corp., 302 F.3d 909, 921 (9th Cir. 2002).

Plaintiff has disputed a total of $3,095.75 in claimed costs and argues that only $1,807.22 in costs may appropriately be awarded. The largest disputed item concerns $2,578.85 incurred for online legal research. Those costs will be disallowed since the expense of computerized legal research are properly deemed as a component of the attorney's fee rather than a reimbursable cost under the purview of 28 U.S.C. § 1920. See Invessys Inc. v. McGraw-Hill Cos., Ltd., 369 F.3d 16, 22-23 (1st Cir. 2004). The Court will also not authorize postage fees of $137.58 and courier charges of $72.65 for picking up certain documents. Neither mail nor courier fees can properly be taxed. See El-Fadl v. Central Bank of Jordan, 163 F.R.D. 389, 390 (D.D.C. 1995).

With respect to the $75.06 claimed for the costs of a color display board, Timberworks has not demonstrated that that exhibit was necessarily obtained for use at trial. Such necessity must be established. Allison v. Bank One-Denver, 289 F.3d 1223, 1249 (10th Cir. 2002).

The final disputed costs item consists of $231.60 in travel related costs incurred by Timberworks attorneys George Vogt, Jr. and Marcus Turner. Although Timberworks does not specify for what reason these particular costs were incurred, it is well established that an attorney's expenses in attending both depositions and other court proceedings are not recoverable as costs. Wahl v. Carrier Mfg. Co., Inc., 511 F.2d 209, 217 (7th Cir. 1975).

Given the foregoing, costs are taxed in favor of Timberworks in the sum of $1,807.22.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Shasta Services Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 22, 2007
No. 2:04-cv-01955-MCE-PAN (E.D. Cal. May. 22, 2007)
Case details for

United States v. Shasta Services Inc.

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the STATE OF CALIFORNIA ex rel. MIKE STIERLI…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: May 22, 2007

Citations

No. 2:04-cv-01955-MCE-PAN (E.D. Cal. May. 22, 2007)

Citing Cases

Toll Brothers, Inc. v. Lin

See Itemization in Supp. of Bill of Costs at 4, 6. These costs are not recoverable under the statute.See…

Terry v. Allstate Insurance Co.

With respect to travel expenses incurred by Allstate's attorneys, the court concludes that Allstate is not…