Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 54(D)

235 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Montgomery v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc.
  671 F.2d 412· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove his termination was a pretext for racial discrimination and affirmed the trial court's judgment.
• Staten v. Hous. Auth. OF THE City OF Pittsburgh
  638 F.2d 599· 3d Cir.· 1980-11-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a local housing authority receiving federal funding is not automatically an "agency" of the United States immune from attorneys' fees awards under 28 U.S.C. § 2412. It also held that the district court must apply the "special circumstances" standard when consi
• United States v. 2
  464 F.2d 676· 10th Cir.· 1972-07-24 ·cited 14×
  An order denying a motion to strike costs is appealable when the court's power to tax costs is challenged, and the 1966 amendment to 28 U.S.C. § 2412 does not authorize taxing costs against the United States in condemnation actions.
• United States upon the relation & for the Use of the Tenn. Valley Auth. v. AN Easement & Right-Of-Way Containing 0.1 Acres
  452 F.2d 729· 6th Cir.· 1971-12-09 ·cited 14×
  The 1966 amendment to 28 U.S.C. § 2412 does not authorize taxation of costs against the United States in eminent domain proceedings.
• Walker v. Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc.
  443 F.2d 33· 7th Cir.· 1971-05-27 ·cited 14×
  A party who unsuccessfully prosecutes a mandamus proceeding to compel a transfer of venue, after denial of a § 1404(a) motion, cannot be compelled to pay the opposing counsel's fees absent a statute, agreement, or recognized exception for bad faith or vexatious litigation.
• Harris v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.
  139 F.2d 571· 2d Cir.· 1943-11-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the District Court erred in disallowing statutory fees for depositions admitted into evidence.
• Echols v. Parker
  909 F.2d 795· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 13×
  A motion for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 is not subject to the ten-day time limit of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) and does not vitiate a previously filed notice of appeal. However, a district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a supplemental attorney's fees
• Munden v. Ultra-Alaska Assocs.
  849 F.2d 383· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 12×
  A notice of appeal filed before the disposition of a timely Rule 59(e) motion is premature and has no effect, requiring a new notice of appeal after the motion's disposition.
• Crossman v. Marcoccio
  806 F.2d 329· 1st Cir.· 1986-12-09 ·cited 12×
  Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 compels prevailing plaintiffs to pay defendants' post-offer costs when the ultimate judgment is less than a refused offer of judgment, but it does not require payment of defendants' post-offer attorney's fees if those fees are not 'properly awar
• Chicago Coll. OF Osteopathic Med. v. George A. Fuller Co.
  801 F.2d 908· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-12 ·cited 12×
  Fees paid to expert witnesses retained by a party, even if crucial to the case, are not taxable as costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, absent specific statutory authorization.
• The First Nat'l Bank IN Sioux Falls v. Dunham
  471 F.2d 712· 8th Cir.· 1973-01-08 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the trial court's judgment regarding fraudulent conveyances and piercing the corporate veil, and found no abuse of discretion in awarding attorney's fees.
• LEE v. United States
  238 F.2d 341· 9th Cir.· 1956-10-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appeal from the order regarding costs was invalid because the order had no effect and was not reviewable on the timely appeal from the judgment. The court also found no merit in the other specifications of error.
• Bank of China v. Wells Fargo Bank & Union Tr. Co. (two cases)
  209 F.2d 467· 9th Cir.· 1953-12-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Wells Fargo should be relieved of liability for interest on a disputed deposit because the circumstances presented complex legal and factual issues without clear precedent, making it inequitable to penalize the bank.
• Crues v. KFC Corp.
  768 F.2d 230· 8th Cir.· 1985-07-16 ·cited 11×
  The court held that jury instructions were proper and evidentiary rulings were not an abuse of discretion, but the taxing of costs was procedurally flawed.
• BEE v. Greaves
  910 F.2d 686· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-02 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the denial of qualified immunity, finding the law regarding involuntary medication of pretrial detainees was clearly established. It affirmed in part and reversed in part the attorney fee award, remanding for reevaluation of fees for successful prior appeals.
• Silvester Trevino, Jr. v. Holly Sugar Corp.
  811 F.2d 896· 5th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's findings of no discrimination and denial of class certification were not clearly erroneous, and affirmed the denial of attorneys' fees and award of costs to the defendants.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. 19.623 Acres OF Land
  602 F.2d 1130· 3d Cir.· 1979-07-17 ·cited 10×
  The district court has the discretion to award costs, including attorney fees, against the government in Virgin Islands condemnation cases, and the prior denial based on a lack of authority was erroneous.
• Dickinson Supply v. Montana-Dakota Utils. Co.
  423 F.2d 106· 8th Cir.· 1970-03-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to allow further cross-examination of a witness with a prior inconsistent statement because a sufficient foundation was not laid, and the denial of the defendant's motion to retax costs was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Bowden
  182 F.2d 251· 10th Cir.· 1950-04-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the taxation of attorney's docket fees as costs is within the sound discretion of the trial court, not mandatory.
• City Bank OF Honolulu v. Artemio Rivera Davila
  438 F.2d 1367· 1st Cir.· 1971-03-08 ·cited 9×
  The court held that Rivera was personally liable for the notes signed by Rodriguez under a power of attorney, and that admissions of liability were admissible. Attorneys' fees for obstinacy were affirmed, but costs were remanded for redetermination.
• United States v. Theron C. Lynd
  334 F.2d 13· 5th Cir.· 1964-07-07 ·cited 9×
  The court held that most costs claimed by the United States in a civil contempt proceeding were taxable, except for the cost of an expedited partial transcript and the transcription of final arguments, which were not deemed necessarily incurred.
• Congregation OF THE Passion v. Touche
  854 F.2d 219· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-05 ·cited 8×
  A district court's judgment silent on costs is considered a 'judgment allowing costs' for the purpose of triggering the 30-day filing period under Local Rule 45(a).
• Hiegel v. Steve Hill & Marvin Owen
  771 F.2d 358· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Paschall cost-assessment rule should not be applied when defendants prevail, due to the chilling effect on litigation rights.
• In re Corrugated Container Antitrust Litigation. Anchor Hocking v. Alton BOX Bd. Co.
  756 F.2d 411· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding the immunized interview testimony, admitting the 'lack of profit' evidence, instructing the jury, denying injunctive relief, denying costs, or denying summary judgment/directed verdict for certain defendants.
• Thomas v. J. C. Penney Co., Inc.
  531 F.2d 270· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a plaintiff must be a prevailing party to receive attorneys fees and costs under Title VII, and that the district court erred in awarding them when no discrimination was found.
• Moylan v. AMF Overseas Corp., S.A.
  354 F.2d 825· 9th Cir.· 1965-12-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing claims against defendants due to lack of jurisdiction, insufficient evidence, or witness immunity, and did not abuse its discretion in taxing costs.
• Roberts v. Madigan
  921 F.2d 1047· 10th Cir.· 1990-12-17 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the school district's actions prohibiting a teacher from reading his Bible and removing religious books from his classroom library violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
• DR. Bernard Heller Found. v. LEE
  847 F.2d 83· 3d Cir.· 1988-05-23 ·cited 7×
  The court held that expert witness fees are limited by 28 U.S.C. § 1821, and that the District Court of the Virgin Islands erred in awarding fees exceeding this limit. The court affirmed the award of attorneys' fees but remanded for further findings on deposition and travel costs
• In re Proceedings By Merrill Lynch Relocation Mgmt. v. Merrill Lynch Relocation Mgmt., Inc.
  812 F.2d 1116· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-12 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the Oregon statute making an attorney liable for the costs of a nonresident plaintiff is substantive law applicable in federal diversity actions and that the contempt order against the attorney was proper.
• Ali v. Prestige Window & Door Installation, LLC.
  626 F. Supp. 2d 1259· S.D. Fla.· 2009-06-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that under 28 U.S.C. § 1919, it has discretion to award 'just costs' when an action is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and awarded most of the defendants' requested costs.
• Davet v. Enrico MacCarone
  973 F.2d 22· 1st Cir.· 1992-08-19 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's rulings, finding no reversible error in the denial of punitive damages, the refusal to grant a new trial, the award of costs, or the dismissal of the attorney fees claim due to lack of jurisdiction.
• Hull v. United States
  971 F.2d 1499· 10th Cir.· 1992-08-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court has the inherent power to order a fully reversionary trust for a handicapped child's damages if it is in the child's best interest, and that interest on the award accrues from the date of the formal judgment entry under Rule 58, not from ear
• Justine Realty Co. v. Am. Nat'l CAN Co.
  945 F.2d 1044· 8th Cir.· 1991-09-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Justine's post-judgment motion for attorney fees was not a request for fees attributable to the case, and therefore did not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal.
• Alflex Corp. v. Underwriters Labs., Inc.
  914 F.2d 175· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that costs for deposition copies and private process servers are properly taxable under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, as these expenses are encompassed by the statute's enumerated categories.
• Quarles v. Oxford Mun. Separate Sch. Dist.
  868 F.2d 750· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dissolving the desegregation order and finding the school district unitary, but did err in awarding costs to the appellants.
• Hibbs v. K-Mart Corp.
  870 F.2d 435· 8th Cir.· 1989-03-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court correctly granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict because there was no direct contractual relationship between the plaintiff and K-Mart, K-Mart did not improperly interfere with the ground lease, and the plaintiff was not an intended th
• Avirgan v. Hull
  705 F. Supp. 1544· S.D. Fla.· 1989-02-02 ·cited 6×
  The court awarded costs and attorneys' fees to the prevailing defendants, disallowing expenses not explicitly permitted by statute or court rules.
• Dataq, Inc. v. Tokheim Corp.
  736 F.2d 601· 10th Cir.· 1984-05-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict on the patent infringement claim, but properly directed a verdict on the breach of contract claim due to the statute of limitations. The denial of attorney's fees was also affirmed.
• Cochran v. E.I. duPONT de Nemours
  933 F.2d 1533· 11th Cir.· 1991-06-19 ·cited 5×
  Federal maritime jurisdiction does not extend to the sailor's personal injury and products liability claims because the exercise of such jurisdiction would not advance the policies behind a uniform federal law of admiralty, and the claims are barred by the Virginia statute of lim
• Fincher v. Keller Indus.
  905 F.2d 691· 3d Cir.· 1990-06-15 ·cited 5×
  A motion for costs, even if mislabeled as a Rule 59(e) motion, does not toll the time for filing an appeal because it is collateral to the merits of the judgment.
• Simpson v. Nancy Welch, M.D.
  900 F.2d 33· 4th Cir.· 1990-04-05 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the dismissal of the complaint was proper, but the award of sanctions under Rule 11 was not authorized. The award of attorneys' fees and costs was vacated and remanded.
• Arkamel Ray Sales v. R.C. Marshall
  873 F.2d 115· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-21 ·cited 5×
  The court held that expenses for transporting state prisoners to federal court in response to a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum are not taxable costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, and that a state entity's motion to intervene to recover such costs was untimely.
• Zackaroff v. Koch Transfer Co.
  862 F.2d 1263· 6th Cir.· 1988-12-07 ·cited 5×
  The court held that attorney fees are not awardable costs under Fed.R.Civ.P. 68 unless authorized by the substantive statute, and that the prevailing party is generally entitled to costs under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d) absent sufficient reason for denial.
• Schlobohm v. Pepperidge Farm
  806 F.2d 578· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-23 ·cited 5×
  The court held that attorney's fees and costs were not recoverable under Texas law because no contractual obligation was breached, but prejudgment interest was recoverable for the use of money owed to the franchisee.
• Armour & Co. v. Nard
  463 F.2d 8· 8th Cir.· 1972-06-07 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding commissions, costs, or the exclusion of evidence concerning oral agreements, and that the jury's findings were supported by the record.
• Azam-Qureshi v. the Colony Hotel, Inc.
  540 F. Supp. 2d 1293· S.D. Fla.· 2008-03-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the plaintiff is entitled to attorney's fees and costs under the FLSA, the requested amount was excessive, and only a fraction of the hours and a reduced hourly rate were reasonable.
• Nenh Phetosomphone v. Allison Reed Grp., Inc.
  984 F.2d 4· 1st Cir.· 1993-01-20 ·cited 4×
  The court should reconsider the district court's award of attorney's fees, as it improperly depreciated the value of the Civil Rights Act by focusing on limited monetary recovery.
• Tang How v. Edward J. Gerrits, Inc.
  756 F. Supp. 1540· S.D. Fla.· 1991-01-22 ·cited 4×
  The court adopted the magistrate's recommendation to award attorney's fees and costs, finding the plaintiff entitled to fees under the contract despite initially electing a quantum meruit theory, and reducing the requested costs based on federal law and reasonableness.
• Parkes v. Hall
  906 F.2d 658· 11th Cir.· 1990-07-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that costs shifted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 are limited to those enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 1920, unless the substantive law applicable to the cause of action explicitly expands this definition.
• Richard O.J. Mayberry v. Walters
  862 F.2d 1040· 3d Cir.· 1988-12-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an attorney has standing to seek fees under § 1988 as a surrogate for the client, and fees can be awarded for services rendered before trial termination. The court also affirmed the denial of new trial motions and costs.