UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

JEAN-ROBERT CADET

Plaintiff

vs

MADEIRA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

BOARD OF EDUCATION

MICHELE W. HUMMEL

CHRIS J. MATE

PAUL W. IMHOFF

Defendants

CASE NO. C-1-01-131

(Magistrate Timothy Hogan)

DEFENDANTS’ REPLY MEMORANDUM

IN SUPPORT OF THEIR BILL OF

COSTS

“Plaintiff’s Exceptions and Objections to Defendants’ Bill of Costs” is

incorrect in two principal respects. First, Columbus, Ohio is within the Southern

District of Ohio, and the amount paid to Clare Stork for her attendance as a witness

was the amount prescribed by law. Second, contrary to plaintiff’s representation,

this Court does not require prior approval for the assessment of deposition

expenses as costs. On Page 7 of the “Court’s Guidelines for Attorney’s Taxation of

Court Costs in the Southern District of Ohio”, the following language appears:

It is the policy of this court to tax costs on depositions used and read

into the record at a hearing or at trial. This is by means of direct,

Case 1:01-cv-00131-TSH Document 82 Filed 12/22/2003 Page 1 of 3
2

indirect, impeachment or rebuttal testimony. The expense of

producing exhibits to a deposition and notary fees incurred in its

taking are taxable costs. It is the policy of this court to tax costs on

depositions that were used in successful motions for summary

judgments, motions to dismiss, and motions to quash.

All the depositions which defendants have submitted for payment were used

at the trial of this matter, and are clearly appropriate for taxation against plaintiff.

Plaintiff has also opposed, without asserted reason, defendants’ claim for

the service fees and mileage to Cindy Cadet. Defendants are unaware of the

basis for plaintiff’s objection to these costs. Cindy Cadet was not a party to the

case, and defendants were required to compel her attendance at trial. The fact that

plaintiff called her in his case, and it was not necessary for defendants to recall

her, does not change the fact that defendants could not voluntarily obtain her

appearance. If Mrs. Cadet wishes to return the fees and mileage which were

tendered to her, defendants will withdraw this item from consideration. Indeed, it is

somewhat ironic that Mrs. Cadet, who is married to the plaintiff, wishes to keep this

money. If she does not want it to be taxed against her husband, she should refund

it to defendants.

Accordingly, the costs submitted by defendants are proper in all respects,

and should be taxed in this matter. 

/s/ R. Gary Winters 

R. Gary Winters 0018680

Bernard W. Wharton 0063487

Attorneys for Defendants

McCASLIN, IMBUS & McCASLIN

Case 1:01-cv-00131-TSH Document 82 Filed 12/22/2003 Page 2 of 3
3

Suite 900 Provident Bank Building

632 Vine Street

Cincinnati, OH 45202-2442

(513) 421-4646

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 22nd day of December, 2003, a copy of the

foregoing document was filed electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent to all

parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this

filing through the Court’s system.

s/ R. Gary Winters 

R. Gary Winters 0018680

Bernard W. Wharton 0063487

Attorneys for Defendants, Madeira City 

School District Board of Education, Michele

W. Hummel, Chris J. Mate, Paul W. Imhoff 

Suite 900 Provident Building

632 Vine Street

Cincinnati, OH 45202-2442

(513) 421-4646 (phone)

(513) 421-7929 (fax)

rgarywinters@zoomtown.com

bwharton@zoomtown.com

Case 1:01-cv-00131-TSH Document 82 Filed 12/22/2003 Page 3 of 3