United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Augusta Division
PATRICIA C. FLOURNOY, Plaintiff,
CML-GA WB, LLC; RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC; REX PROPERTY AND LAND, LLC; and PAUL GREGORY KING, Defendants.
RANDAL HALL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CHIEF JUDGE
prevailing parties, Defendants in this case move for costs
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54. Because Plaintiff
does not object to REX Property and Land, LLC's and Paul
King's bill of costs, their request is GRANTED. But
because Plaintiff raises meritorious objections to CML-GA WB,
LLC's and Rialto Capital Advisors! LLC's (the
"Rialto Defendants'') bill of costs, their
request is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
Court granted summary judgment in this case in December 2015.
(Doc. 62.) Plaintiff appealed! that ruling in January 2016.
(Doc. 65.) Around the same time, Defendants moved the j Court
to tax costs, but the Court deferred ruling on those requests
until the Eleventh Circuit issued its decision. (Doc. 83.)
The Eleventh Circuit has now affirmed this Court's grant
of summary judgment, and Defendants have renewed their
requests for costs.
Rule 54(d), prevailing parties are entitled to certain costs.
But the Court's authority to tax costs is statutorily
(1) [f]ees of the clerk and marshal; (2) [f]ees for printed
or electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained
for use in the case; (3) [f]ees and disbursements for
printing and witnesses; (4) [f]ees for exemplification and
the costs of making copies of any materials where the copies
are necessarily obtained for use in the case; (5) [d]ocket
fees under [28 U.S.C. § 1923]; [and] (6) [c]ompensation
of court appointed experts, compensation of interpreters, and
salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of special interpretation
services under [28 U.S.C. § 1828].
28 U.S.C. § 1920.
The Rialto Defendants' Costs
Rialto Defendants ask the Court to award $8, 151.87 in costs:
(1) $259.16 in clerk fees; (2) $4, 142.79 in transcript fees;
(3) $2, 103.20 in printing fees; (4) $101.47 in witness fees;
and (5) $1, 545.25 in fees paid to a private investigator.
(Doc. 86-1.) Plaintiff objects to the $2, 103.20 in printing
fees and the $1, 545.25 paid to the private investigator.
argues that private-investigator fees are not recoverable as
costs because they are not listed in § 1920. See
North v. Mayo Grp. Dev., LLC, No. 3: ll-cv-444-J-32 JBT,
2013 WL 3461932, at *3 (M.D. Fla. July 9, 2013) ("This
Court and others have held that [fees paid to private
investigators] are not taxable as costs under §
1920."). The Rialto Defendants concede this point (doc.
89 at 1), and the Court thus DENIES their request for this