Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

HARRIS v. PICTURE PEOPLE

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division


November 19, 2004.

PHYLLIS L. HARRIS, Plaintiff,
v.
THE PICTURE PEOPLE, Defendant.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: ARLANDER KEYS, Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Phyllis Harris sued her former employer, the Picture People (the "Company"), alleging violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 et seq. (West 2004). On August 18, 2004, this Court granted Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, finding that Plaintiff's suit was not timely filed. Defendant subsequently submitted its Bill for Taxable Costs, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1). For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Defendant its costs.

Discussion

  Plaintiff argues that the Court must deny Defendant's Bill for Costs, because: 1) it was not filed within 14 days of judgment, as required by Fed.R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2); and 2) Defendant failed to show that Plaintiff's case was frivolous or filed in bad faith. In the event that the Court should find that Defendant is, nevertheless, entitled to its costs, Plaintiff argues that the costs relating to her deposition should not be recoverable, as they were not necessary to the disposition of this case.

  First, the Court finds that Defendant's Bill for Costs was timely filed. Although Rule 54(d)(2), and its corresponding 14 day deadline, governs petitions for attorneys' fees, Local Rule 54.1 applies to bills for taxable costs. Local Rule 54.1 permits a prevailing party to file its bill of costs 30 days from the entry of judgment. Therefore, Defendant's Bill of Costs, which was filed 29 days from the entry of judgment,*fn1 was timely filed.

  Next, Defendant is not required to demonstrate bad faith to collect its costs. Rule 54(d)(1) provides that "costs other than attorney's fees shall be allowed as of course to the prevailing party unless the court otherwise directs." Fed.R. Civ. P. 54(d). "The prevailing party is prima facie entitled to costs and it is incumbent on the losing party to overcome the presumption." McGill v. Faulkner, 18 F.3d 456, 459 (7th Cir. 1994). This presumption is difficult to overcome, and the Court must award costs unless the losing party establishes a reason to deny costs. Weeks v. Samsung Heavy Indus. Co., Ltd., 126 F.3d 926, 945 (7th Cir. 1997). In general, a court may deny costs for two reasons: 1) the losing party is unable to pay;*fn2 and 2) the prevailing party engaged in misconduct. Id. Because Plaintiff has asserted neither indigence nor Defendant's bad faith, the Court finds that Defendant is entitled to its taxable costs.

  Finally, Plaintiff argues that Defendant should not be permitted to recoup its costs for taking Plaintiff's deposition, because it was not necessary to establish that Plaintiff failed to satisfy the Americans with Disabilities Act's statute of limitations. Defendant correctly notes, however, that the only evidence concerning when Plaintiff received her Right to Sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") was obtained during her deposition. The Court agrees that the deposition was taken in good faith, and declines to exclude the costs associated with the deposition. Conclusion

  For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendant's Bill of Taxable Costs in its entirety. The Court finds that Defendant is entitled to recover from Plaintiff $1,024.87, as follows: (1) $30.00 for fees for service of summons and subpoena; 2) $697.95 for deposition costs; 3) $1.54 for printing fees; and 4) $295.38 for copying fees.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.