From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Blickley v. Ford

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division
Apr 12, 2011
Case No. 6:08-cv-1866-Orl-31GJK (M.D. Fla. Apr. 12, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 6:08-cv-1866-Orl-31GJK.

April 12, 2011


ORDER


On March 22, 2011, Magistrate Judge Kelly entered a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 80), recommending that the Plaintiff's Motion in Objection to Defendant's Bill of Costs (Doc. 77) be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Report (Doc. 81). Upon de novo review of the above, the Court concurs with the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. In particular, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that the cost of transcribing Plaintiff's testimony in two other cases was properly taxable under 28 U.S.C. § 1920(2), in that the transcripts were necessarily obtained for use in this case, even if the testimony was originally intended for use in another case.

ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is Adopted and Confirmed;

2. The Motion Filed in Objection to Bill of Costs (Doc. 77) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as set forth in the Report and Recommendation, and;

3. The Clerk is directed to enter a cost judgment against the Plaintiff in the amount of $3,935.89.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, Orlando, Florida on April 12, 2011.


Summaries of

Blickley v. Ford

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division
Apr 12, 2011
Case No. 6:08-cv-1866-Orl-31GJK (M.D. Fla. Apr. 12, 2011)
Case details for

Blickley v. Ford

Case Details

Full title:DANA R. BLICKLEY, Plaintiff, v. JIM FORD, in his individual capacity, and…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division

Date published: Apr 12, 2011

Citations

Case No. 6:08-cv-1866-Orl-31GJK (M.D. Fla. Apr. 12, 2011)