Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 3, 2022

Carbon Crest LLC v. Tencue Productions, LLC

Judge
William Alsup
Docket
3:19-cv-08179
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
Fee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Carbon Crest v. Tencue, Judge Alsup awarded plaintiff’s counsel $21,451 in taxable costs, excluding $555 for subpoena service.

Who this affects

Carbon Crest’s counsel received $21,451 in taxable costs; the $555 subpoena-service charge was excluded. Tencue Productions, LLC and Jeffrey D. Wilk were the opposing defendants.

What happened

In Carbon Crest, LLC v. Tencue Productions, LLC and Jeffrey D. Wilk, the plaintiff had previously obtained a judgment in its favor after a trial before the judge. Plaintiff’s counsel then asked the court to award $22,006 in costs. Both sides had appealed the earlier judgment.

Judge Alsup ruled that the plaintiff was entitled to recover allowable costs under the federal cost rule and that its filing, affidavit, and supporting documents complied with the court’s local rules. The court allowed costs for filing and serving the complaint, deposition transcripts, reproducing discovery materials and trial exhibits, and witness attendance and mileage. It did not allow $555 for serving subpoenas for document production.

The court granted the motion for costs in part and denied it in part. Judge William Alsup taxed, or formally awarded, $21,451 in costs to plaintiff’s counsel.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Carbon Crest LLC v. Tencue Productions, LLC · No. 3:19-cv-08179
Judge
William Alsup
Date
June 3, 2022

Background

Carbon Crest brought a diversity action seeking payment under an agreement concerning the possible sale of Tencue Productions. After a four-day trial before the judge, the court entered a judgment in Carbon Crest’s favor. The opinion states that Carbon Crest did not recover on its contract claim because the agreement was void, but did recover on a quasi-contract theory. The defendants did not recover on their counterclaims. Both sides appealed the earlier judgment.

Plaintiff’s counsel timely filed a bill of costs seeking $22,006. The defendants did not timely object. The filing included a supporting affidavit and documentation for each claimed cost.

Legal standard

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) generally directs courts to allow costs other than attorney’s fees to the prevailing party. A prevailing party must receive at least some relief on the merits, but need not win every claim. The court’s local rule, Civil Local Rule 54-3, identifies which costs may be taxed. The court also explained that filing an appeal from the merits judgment did not prevent it from deciding the costs issue.

Allowed and disallowed costs

The court allowed costs for filing the complaint and serving the defendants. It also allowed the costs of one original and one copy of deposition transcripts for defendants and trial witnesses Wilk, Kristin Leimkuhler, Kavita Vora, and Miriam Agrell. The court allowed costs for reproducing formal discovery documents and trial exhibits, as well as per diem attendance and mileage fees paid to trial witnesses.

The court rejected the claimed costs for serving subpoenas for document production. It interpreted the local rules as allowing fees for service of process, but not fees for serving those subpoenas.

Disposition

The order states that the motion for costs was GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. It awarded costs to plaintiff’s counsel except for the $555 in subpoena-service costs, resulting in a total of $21,451 taxed. IT IS SO ORDERED by William Alsup, United States District Judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.