United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 
MCCOY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Tax Costs and
Incorporated Memorandum of Law, filed on June 25, 2019. (Doc.
114). The motion states that Plaintiff opposes the requested
relief (see Id. at 4), but Plaintiff
Preston Towns has not filed a timely response and the
deadline by which to do so has lapsed, see M.D. Fla.
R. 3.01(b). Defendant, the School Board of Lee County,
Florida, moves this Court under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54, M.D. Fla. R.
4.18, and 28 U.S.C. § 1920 for an award of certain costs
necessarily incurred by Defendant in this case. For the
reasons below, the Undersigned respectfully
RECOMMENDS that the requested relief be
Preston Towns, initially brought this putative class action
along with other Plaintiffs against their employer, Defendant
Lee County School Board, alleging violations of Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1963, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, the
Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, Fla. Stat. § 760.01
et seq., and violations of 42 U.S.C. §§
1981 and 1983 for unlawful racial discrimination in promoting
to and hiring for assistant principals positions.
(SeeDoc. 1; Doc. 39). Plaintiff Towns alleged he was
“demoted, ” and that Defendant failed to promote
him, because of his race. (Doc. 39 at ¶¶ 51-75,
Counts I-V). He sought injunctive relief, back pay, front
pay, attorney's fees, costs, and compensatory damages,
among other relief. (Id.).
an unsuccessful bid for class certification (seeDoc.
51), all of the named Plaintiffs eventually settled or
resolved their individual claims, except for Preston Towns
(seeDoc. 91). Plaintiff Towns' individual case
proceeded to summary judgment and the presiding United States
District Judge ultimately granted summary judgment in
Defendant's favor on June 10, 2019. (Doc. 112). The Clerk
of Court entered a Judgment in Defendant's favor on June
11, 2019. (Doc. 113). Fourteen days later, the Defendant
timely filed the motion sub judice. (Doc. 114);
seeM.D. Fla. R. 4.18 (“In accordance with
Fed.R.Civ.P. 54, all claims for costs . . . preserved by
appropriate pleading or pretrial stipulation shall be
asserted by separate motion or petition filed not later than
14 days following the entry of judgment.”).
to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1), “[u]nless a federal statute,
these rules, or a court order provides otherwise, costs-other
than attorney's fees-should be allowed to the prevailing
party.” The language of Rule 54 creates a presumption
in favor of awarding costs to the prevailing party, which
presumption the losing party must rebut. See
Manor Healthcare Corp. v. Lomelo, 929 F.2d 633, 639
(11th Cir. 1991). Moreover, Congress has comprehensively
regulated the taxation of costs in federal courts.
Crawford Fitting Co. v. J.T. Gibbons, Inc., 482 U.S.
437, 444-45 (1987). Section 1920 provides a list of taxable
costs as follows:
(1) Fees of the clerk and marshal;
(2) Fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts
necessarily obtained for use in the case;
(3) Fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses;
(4) Fees for exemplification and the costs of making copies
of any materials where the copies are necessarily obtained
for use in the case;
(5) Docket fees under section 1923 of this title;
(6) Compensation of court appointed experts, compensation of
interpreters, and salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of
special interpretation services ...