UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 26, 2009
GLENDA M. LEWIS AND GLENN E. LEWIS, PLAINTIFFS,
MAMMOTH MOUNTAIN SKI AREA, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Oliver W. Wanger United States District Judge
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS' BILL OF COSTS AND VACATING ORDER TAXING PLAINTIFFS' COSTS TO DEFENDANT
On March 29, 2009, Defendant made an offer to Plaintiffs pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 in the amount of $100,001.00. Doc. 163-3. On May 13, 2009, after a five day jury trial, judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendant in the amount of $61,375.90. Doc. 157.
Pursuant to Rule 68, a plaintiff whose judgment is less than the Rule 68 offer must bear all costs, both their own and those of the defendant, incurred after the Rule 68 offer was made. Champion Produce, Inc. v. Ruby Robinson Co., Inc., 342 F.3d 1016, 1026 (9th Cir. 2003) ("A plaintiff that rejects a Rule 68 offer in excess of the judgment ultimately obtained at trial must bear its own and the defendant's post-offer costs."). On May 20, 2009, Plaintiffs submitted their bill of costs, which includes costs incurred after the Rule 68 offer was made on March 29, 2009. Doc. 160. On June 23, 2009, the Clerk of Court taxed Plaintiffs' costs against Defendant in the full amount requested. That order is VACATED as it was entered in error.
Plaintiffs have filed motions to alter or amend the judgment, Doc. 159, and for new trial, Doc. 161, the outcome of which may affect the final judgment in this case. If both of these motions are denied, Plaintiffs shall resubmit their bill of costs to reflect only those costs incurred prior to March 29, 2009. Any such revised bill of costs shall be submitted within ten days of electronic service of the decisions on Plaintiffs' pending motions. If either or both of Plaintiffs' pending motions are granted, the court will entertain revised bills of costs after any revised judgment is entered.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.