Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

MAROTTA v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, 14-11149. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20170224g68 Visitors: 10
Filed: Feb. 23, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 23, 2017
Summary: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' BILL OF COSTS (DOC. 116) GEORGE CARAM STEEH , District Judge . Plaintiff Alanna Marotta brought this action, alleging that defendants Ford Motor Company, Michael Wendel, Michael Brudzinski, and Thomas Garrity discriminated and retaliated against her, and sexually harassed her in the workplace. A jury trial was held from October 11, 2016 to October 17. 2016. The jury found no cause of action against defendants. This matter is pres
More

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' BILL OF COSTS (DOC. 116)

Plaintiff Alanna Marotta brought this action, alleging that defendants Ford Motor Company, Michael Wendel, Michael Brudzinski, and Thomas Garrity discriminated and retaliated against her, and sexually harassed her in the workplace. A jury trial was held from October 11, 2016 to October 17. 2016. The jury found no cause of action against defendants. This matter is presently before the Court on plaintiff's motion in opposition to defendants' bill of costs.

The Clerk of Court issued a Taxed Bill of Costs granting costs for service fees, court reporter fees, and witness fees. (Doc. 114 at 1). Plaintiff petitions the Court to review this Bill of Costs and deny Angelo Marotta's witness fee and all but one of the court reporter fees.

Angelo Marotta's witness fees are taxable pursuant to section (II)(E)(1)(a) of the Court's Bill of Costs Handbook. Additionally, all of defendants' requested court reporter fees are taxable under section (II)(C)(1)(d) of the Court's Bill of Costs Handbook. Every deposition transcript at issue was used in support of a motion and defendants provided the taxation clerk with the title of the motion, the date it was filed, and the exhibit number. Further, excerpts of the deposition transcripts used in support of these motions were attached as exhibits to the motions.

Therefore, plaintiff's motion in opposition to defendants' bill of costs is DENIED. The Court awards defendants $6,680.49 in costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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