Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Borum v. Illinois Central Railroad, Co., 13-cv-12421. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20141009f13 Visitors: 9
Filed: Oct. 08, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 08, 2014
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' BILL OF COSTS (ECF #31) AND TAXING COSTS ON PLAINTIFF MATTHEW F. LEITMAN, District Judge. On August 5, 2014, this Court issued an Opinion and Order granting Defendants Illinois Central Railroad, Co.'s and Colin McKelvie's Motion for Summary Judgment. ( See ECF #27.) The Court also entered a Judgment in favor of Defendants. ( See ECF #28.) Defendants thereafter requested that the Clerk of Court tax costs in the amount of $1,477.00 that they incurred in connection w
More

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' BILL OF COSTS (ECF #31) AND TAXING COSTS ON PLAINTIFF

MATTHEW F. LEITMAN, District Judge.

On August 5, 2014, this Court issued an Opinion and Order granting Defendants Illinois Central Railroad, Co.'s and Colin McKelvie's Motion for Summary Judgment. (See ECF #27.) The Court also entered a Judgment in favor of Defendants. (See ECF #28.) Defendants thereafter requested that the Clerk of Court tax costs in the amount of $1,477.00 that they incurred in connection with the depositions of McKelvie and Plaintiff Patsy Borum (the "Depositions"). (See the "Bill of Costs," ECF #31.) The Clerk denied Defendants' request because (1) "the bill of costs d[id] not document how the [Deposition] transcripts were used" in the litigation, and (2) "[n]o receipt/invoice was provided as to the court reporter fees for ... McKelvie[`s]" Deposition (See the "Clerk's Denial," ECF #32 at 1-2, Pg. ID 360-61.)

On September 12, 2014, Defendants filed their "Objections to Denial of Costs." (See the "Objections," ECF #33.) The Court (through its case manager) informed the parties via electronic mail that it would treat the Objections as a motion to review the Clerk's Denial pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and that Plaintiff would have the opportunity to respond to the Objections. (See Exhibit A, attached.) Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(e)(2), the time for filing a response has now expired, and Plaintiff has not filed a response.

The Court has reviewed the Objections and finds that Defendants have (1) demonstrated that they relied on the Depositions in their Motion for Summary Judgment, and (2) submitted an invoice for the cost of McKelvie's deposition. (See Objections at 1-2, Pg. ID 363-64; ECF #33-1 at 3, Pg. ID 369.) Accordingly, the Court finds that Defendants' request for costs is appropriate.

For the reasons explained above, Defendants' Bill of Costs (ECF #31) is GRANTED. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that costs in the amount of $1,477.00 are taxed on Plaintiff Patsy Borum.

EXHIBIT A

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer