Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00340/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00340-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)

---

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 * This matter was determined to be suitable for decision without

oral argument. L.R. 78-230(h).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DENNIS L. PARKER, )

) 2:06-cv-340-GEB-KJM

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER*

)

YUBA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, )

)

Defendant. )

)

Plaintiff moves to set aside $4674.17 taxed as costs in this

action, arguing inter alia that “an award of costs is inappropriate in

view of [his] financial condition.” (Not. of Mot. at 2:1-2.) 

Defendant opposes this motion.

Defendant, as the prevailing party, filed a bill of costs

for costs necessarily incurred in defending this action. (Req. for

Costs at 1.) Defendant requested $5149.27 and the Clerk approved

$4674.17 in costs pursuant to Local Rule 54-292. (Bill of Costs at

1.) 

Case 2:06-cv-00340-GEB -KJM Document 110 Filed 07/30/07 Page 1 of 4
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

Plaintiff contends the $4674.17 in costs taxed should be

reduced or denied altogether because he “has very limited financial

resources.” (Pl.’s Mot. at 3:24.) Defendant rejoins that considering

Plaintiff’s assets and income, “he can surely afford to pay

[Defendant] for the less than $5000 in taxed costs it incurred in

defending this action.” (Def.’s Opp’n at 6:5-7.) 

Plaintiff declares he is 61 years old and that he and his

wife should not bear the hardship of the costs award in light of their

financial and health condition. (Parker Decl. ¶ 1.) He further

declares he has “a disability, chronic depression, anxiety, and

related disorders” and he has not been employed since he was

terminated in December of 2005. (Id.) Plaintiff’s wife is also not

employed. (Id.) Plaintiff has financial assets, but declares they

are needed to support him and his wife. (Id.) Plaintiff had $100,000

in his pension account when he was terminated. (Id. ¶ 3.) He

withdrew the entire amount and used $30,000 to pay his attorney,

$25,000 to pay his credit card debt, and exhausted the remaining

$45,000 paying his living expenses through 2006. (Id.) Plaintiff

received $17,000 in disability benefits from the state of California

after he was terminated, but is no longer receiving these benefits. 

(Id. ¶ 2.) Plaintiff made $10,000 through his gold mining hobby from

August 2006 through May 2007. (Id. ¶ 4.) Plaintiff explains he

expects to begin receiving pension benefits of $700 - $800 a month,

but these benefits have not yet started. (Id. ¶ 5.) Plaintiff owns

his home and has a first and second mortgage on the home with little

equity. (Id. ¶ 7.) Plaintiff inherited some property appraised at

$125,000 which he is attempting to sell. (Id. ¶ 8.) However,

Plaintiff declares he will need the proceeds from this sale “to live

Case 2:06-cv-00340-GEB -KJM Document 110 Filed 07/30/07 Page 2 of 4
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

on.” (Id.) Plaintiff has personal property with an estimated value

of $9000. (Id. ¶ 9.) Plaintiff has no other source of income. (Id.

¶ 1.) 

Further, Plaintiff paid $731 for health insurance each month

through June 2007. (Id. ¶ 6.) At the time Plaintiff filed his

declaration he was unsure what he and his wife would do for health

insurance since Plaintiff’s COBRA expired in June 2007. (Id.) Since

Plaintiff and his wife both have serious health problems, he declares

they “do not know how [they] are going to provide for [their] health

care needs.” (Id.)

“[T]he losing party’s limited financial resources” is a

valid reason for refusing to award costs. Ass’n of Mexican-American

Educators v. State of Cal., 231 F.3d 572, 592 (9th Cir. 2000). Here,

Plaintiff and his wife both have health problems, lack health

insurance, and are unemployed. Their only potential source of

consistent income will be Plaintiff’s pension benefits of no more than

$800 each month. Plaintiff’s previous health insurance cost $731 each

month and therefore, it appears Plaintiff’s pension benefits will

likely cover no more than their health care costs. Although Plaintiff

inherited property valued at $125,000, if Plaintiff is successful in

selling the property, it appears Plaintiff will need the proceeds for

living expenses. To pay the $4674.17 in taxed costs, Plaintiff would

have to expend a significant portion of his current available assets,

which are used to cover Plaintiff and his wife’s basic needs. (Parker 

///

///

///

///

Case 2:06-cv-00340-GEB -KJM Document 110 Filed 07/30/07 Page 3 of 4
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

4

Decl. ¶ 11.) For the stated reasons, the taxation of costs is vacated

and costs are denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 27, 2007

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00340-GEB -KJM Document 110 Filed 07/30/07 Page 4 of 4