Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois denies Defendants’ bills of costs in William Johnson’s prisoner civil-rights action. The court sustains Johnson’s objection, finding the medical Defendants’ bill untimely and concluding that Johnson was indigent and incapable of paying the non-medical Defendants’ requested deposition costs.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the medical defendants' bill of costs should be denied as untimely under the Southern District of Illinois local rule.
- Whether the court should deny the non-medical defendants' timely bill of costs because Johnson was indigent and incapable of paying the costs now or in the foreseeable future.
- Whether Johnson's good faith and the nonfrivolous nature of his claims supported denying costs despite the presumption favoring an award to the prevailing party.
Holdings
- The medical defendants' bill of costs was untimely under Southern District of Illinois Local Rule 54.2(c) and therefore had to be denied.
- The court denied the non-medical defendants' timely bill of costs because Johnson was indigent and incapable of paying the costs at the time of the decision or in the near future.
- Johnson's good faith in filing the action and the nonfrivolous nature of his claims supported the court's discretionary denial of the non-medical defendants' costs.
Key quotations
“The rule provides a presumption that the losing party will pay costs but grants the court discretion to direct otherwise.” (at 2)
“To deny a bill of costs on the grounds of indigence, “the district court must make a threshold factual finding that the losing party is ‘incapable of paying the court-imposed costs at this time or in the future.’”” (at 2)
“The indigence exception to the cost-shifting presumption is narrow, and the non-prevailing party bears the burden to overcome the presumption.” (at 3)
Factual background
Johnson is incarcerated in the Illinois Department of Corrections and proceeded in forma pauperis. He reported owing substantial restitution and other debts, having no income or assets, and possessing only $193.10 in his inmate trust account. His projected discharge date was February 28, 2041, and the court found him incapable of paying defendants' requested deposition costs at present or in the near future.
Procedural history
Johnson filed this prisoner civil-rights action in July 2021. After the original complaint was dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, he was permitted to proceed on an amended complaint asserting three Eighth Amendment claims against eight defendants. The court entered summary judgment for the remaining defendants and dismissed the action on September 26, 2025. Defendants then filed bills of costs, one timely and one untimely, and Johnson objected based principally on his indigence.