68 F. Supp. 3d 152
D.D.C.2014Background
- Salah N. Osseiran sued International Finance Corporation (IFC) for breach of a confidentiality agreement; after a bench trial the court awarded plaintiff nominal damages of $1 and entered final judgment for plaintiff.
- Plaintiff filed a Bill of Costs for $24,166.26; the Clerk taxed costs but reduced a duplicate transcript charge by $57.50.
- IFC moved to retax costs, arguing (1) Osseiran was not a "prevailing party" entitled to costs because he received only de minimis relief, and (2) several specific cost items (expert witness travel and fees, transcript charges, exhibit binder costs, PACER fees) are not taxable under 28 U.S.C. § 1920 and Local Civil Rule 54.1.
- The magistrate judge reviewed Rule 54(d)(1), § 1920, and Local Civil Rule 54.1 and held a hearing on the retaxation motion.
- The court concluded that a nominal damages award makes Osseiran a prevailing party for purposes of costs, but examined each challenged cost item for statutory and local-rule compliance.
- The court allowed most claimed costs but reduced airfare for the plaintiff’s rebuttal expert by 50%, disallowed exhibit binder preparation costs, corrected an arithmetic error in transcript totals, and ordered removal of PACER costs waived by plaintiff.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiff is a "prevailing party" entitled to costs | Farrar and D.C. precedent: nominal damages make plaintiff prevailing | Nominal $1 on one of three claims is de minimis; not entitlement to costs | Plaintiff is a prevailing party; nominal damages suffice for costs under Rule 54(d)(1) (Farrar instructive) |
| Recoverability of costs for a rebuttal expert who did not testify | Costs (attendance, subsistence, airfare) are taxable: expert was retained and reasonably expected to testify; deposition/transcript used for preparation | Local Rule limits taxable witness fees to witnesses who testified; airfare was not the most economical | Attendance and subsistence allowed; airfare reduced by 50% (business class not permitted; short‑notice purchases considered) |
| Recoverability of deposition, hearing, pretrial, and trial transcripts | Transcripts were necessarily obtained for use (preparation, possible appeal, post-trial filings) and invoices supplied | Local Rule restrictions argued; claimed insufficient documentation | Transcript costs allowed as ‘‘necessarily obtained’’ under § 1920(2); clerk’s arithmetic corrected to $10,269.52 |
| Recoverability of exhibit binder preparation and copying costs | Binder preparation aided trial presentation; used by parties and court | Binder/tabs fall outside copying/exemplification costs taxable under § 1920 | Binder preparation costs ($980.64) denied; copying/exemplification otherwise treated per § 1920 |
Key Cases Cited
- Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103 (1992) (nominal damages can create prevailing-party status for fee/cost awards)
- Tunison v. Continental Airlines Corp., 162 F.3d 1187 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (distinguishes judgments with no damages from nominal-damages rulings for prevailing-party analysis)
- FCE Benefit Admins., Inc. v. George Washington Univ., 209 F. Supp. 2d 232 (D.D.C. 2002) (nominal damages in breach-of-contract case support taxation of costs though not attorney’s fees)
- Guevara v. Onyewu, 943 F. Supp. 2d 192 (D.D.C. 2013) (deposition transcript recoverability assessed as of time transcript was taken; Local Rule does not limit § 1920)
- Johnson v. Holway, 522 F. Supp. 2d 12 (D.D.C. 2007) (transcripts ‘‘necessarily obtained’’ if required for preparation or filings ordered post-trial)
- Sun Ship, Inc. v. Lehman, 655 F.2d 1311 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (use of deposition transcripts in preparation can make them taxable)