Harrosh v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency; George and Virginia Johannessen

Summary

The court addresses competing motions for costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) after partially favorable outcomes for plaintiff Michael Harrosh and defendants George and Virginia Johannessen. It determines that both sides partially prevailed and equitably allocates recoverable costs, excluding attorney intellectual labor from the defendants’ administrative-record expenses. The court awards Harrosh $201 and the Johannessens $9,077.81, resulting in a net costs award of $8,876.81 to the Johannessens.

Holdings

1. When parties each obtain some relief but fail to achieve their objectives in meaningful respects, each may be considered a partial prevailing party rather than one party being treated as the sole prevailing party.
2. Rule 54 permits a district court to allocate costs equitably among parties when it cannot fairly be said that one party is the sole prevailing party.
3. Costs for collecting, copying, digitizing, organizing, indexing, numbering, serving, and filing an administrative record may be taxable under Rule 54, but attorney intellectual effort and entries combining taxable and non-taxable work are not properly awardable costs.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Harrosh or the Johannessens qualified as the prevailing party for purposes of Rule 54(d)(1) when each achieved only partial success.
2. Whether the court could equitably allocate taxable costs equally between Harrosh and the Johannessens when no party was the sole prevailing party.
3. Which portions of the Johannessens' administrative-record expenses constituted taxable costs rather than non-taxable attorney intellectual labor.
4. What amount of costs should be awarded to each party after excluding improper or mixed entries.

Disposition

other