Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-00039/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-00039-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 1

 This disposition is not designated for publication and may not be cited.

Case No. C 04-0039 JF

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RE-TAX COSTS

(JFLC1)

**E-Filed 11/17/2006**

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

WILLIAM CHESNEY,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al.,

 Defendants.

Case Number C 04-0039 JF

ORDER1 GRANTING MOTION TO

RE-TAX COSTS

[re: docket no. 59]

On January 6, 2004, Plaintiff William Chesney (“Chesney”) brought suit challenging his

arrest for public intoxication. The case proceeded to jury trial, with a finding against Chesney. 

The Court taxed Chesney costs of $876.70. Chesney moves the Court to re-tax the costs to zero. 

Chesney testified at trial that he is a person of very limited means and now lives in his car. 

Defendants have not responded to the motion. The Court heard oral argument on November 17,

2006. 

Fed. Rule Civ. Pro. 54(d)(1) states that costs will be taxed as of course “unless the court

otherwise directs,” and allows for court review of costs by the filing of a motion within five days

Case 5:04-cv-00039-JF Document 64 Filed 11/17/06 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Case No. C 04-0039 JF

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RE-TAX COSTS

(JFLC1)

of their being taxed. There is a presumption in favor of taxing costs. National Info. Servs., Inc.

v. TRW, Inc., 51 F.3d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir.1995). However, the Ninth Circuit has found that a

District Court abuses its discretion if it fails to take into account the indigence of the moving

party and the potential chilling effect of costs on future civil rights litigation. Stanley v.

University of Southern California, 178 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 1999).

The Court concludes that Chesney’s indigence justifies the re-taxing of costs to zero. 

Accordingly, the Court will grant the motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 17, 2006.

 

JEREMY FOGEL

United States District Judge

Case 5:04-cv-00039-JF Document 64 Filed 11/17/06 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

Case No. C 04-0039 JF

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RE-TAX COSTS

(JFLC1)

This Order has been served upon the following persons:

Anthony Boskovich policemisconduct@compuserve.com 

Robert Baker Burchfiel CAO.Main@ci.sj.ca.us 

Michael J. Dodson cao.main@sanjoseca.gov 

Case 5:04-cv-00039-JF Document 64 Filed 11/17/06 Page 3 of 3