Thomas v. City of New York
- James Oetken
- 1:17-cv-08593
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Thomas v. City of New York, Judge Oetken waived $3,235.70 in costs because plaintiffs lacked resources and the City had far greater resources.
Kenya Thomas and Tyana Miller were excused from paying the $3,235.70 in costs listed in the City of New York’s bill of costs.
What happened
In Thomas v. City of New York, Kenya Thomas and Tyana Miller objected to a bill of costs filed by the City of New York. The City did not respond to their objection.
The plaintiffs had been allowed to proceed without paying filing fees and reported having about $150 per week for expenses other than rent and transportation. The court found that paying the requested $3,235.70 would be virtually impossible and that there was a wide difference between the plaintiffs’ resources and the City’s approximately $107 billion budget.
Judge J. Paul Oetken granted the plaintiffs’ request to waive the bill of costs. He directed the Clerk of Court to excuse them from the costs listed in the cited filing.
The detailed version
- Thomas v. City of New York · No. 1:17-cv-08593
- James Oetken
- Sept. 10, 2024
Background
On August 26, 2024, Kenya Thomas and Tyana Miller objected to the City of New York’s bill of costs, which the City had filed on August 22, 2024. The City did not respond.
Analysis
The court explained that indigency does not automatically prevent an award of costs, but a plaintiff’s lack of financial resources may justify denying costs, especially when there is a large difference in resources between the parties. The plaintiffs had been permitted to proceed without paying filing fees and had stated that they had approximately $150 per week to cover expenses other than rent and transportation. The court considered the additional costs of food, health care, and raising a child in New York City. It found that paying the $3,235.70 demanded from the plaintiffs would be “virtually impossible.” The court also considered the City’s approximately $107 billion budget and found a wide disparity in resources.
Ruling
Judge J. Paul Oetken granted the plaintiffs’ request to waive the bill of costs. The Clerk of Court was directed to excuse the plaintiffs from the costs listed in the cited filing.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.