1 – OPINION AND ORDER 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION

NORTHWEST BANK f/k/a NORTHWEST 

SAVINGS BANK, 

Plaintiff,

v.

MCKEE FAMILY FARMS, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

No. 3:15-cv-01576-MO 

OPINION AND ORDER

MOSMAN, J., 

BACKGROUND 

On September 23, 2016, I issued a Final Judgment [280] in this case, which ordered that 

Defendants be awarded their costs, pursuant to Rule 54(d). Defendants Creekside Valley Farms, 

KCK Farms, and Grouped Defendants submitted a Bill of Costs [281, 282, 283]. Plaintiff 

objected to some of the items included in Defendants’ submissions [284].

Specifically, Plaintiff objects to Grouped Defendants’ request for costs associated with 

the depositions of Bruce McKee ($171.60), T.K. Creal ($1,222.15), and Terry Ross ($204.75),

and the cost to receive a rushed copy of the trial transcript ($333.77). Additionally, Plaintiff 

objects to requests from Creekside Valley Farms and KCK Farms for half the cost of T.K. 

Case 3:15-cv-01576-MO Document 289 Filed 12/06/16 Page 1 of 3
2 – OPINION AND ORDER 

Creal’s deposition ($485.40). Plaintiff argues that Defendants cannot recover these costs 

because the depositions were not used at trial or as part of dispositive motions. 

Creekside Valley Farms and KCK Farms argue the deposition of Mr. Creal was 

reasonably necessary at the time it was taken. Mr. Creal was a witness at trial and the deposition 

was used for the purposes of responding to Plaintiff’s motions for summary judgment. Grouped 

Defendants failed to respond to Plaintiff’s objections to their Bill of Costs [283].

LEGAL STANDARD 

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1920 enumerates the expenses that a federal court may award to a 

prevailing party under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d). Crawford Fitting Co. v. J.T. 

Gibbons, Inc., 482 U.S. 437, 441-42 (1987). Accordingly, under Rule 54(d), a prevailing party 

may recover the ordinary costs of litigation, other than attorney fees. Id.; Frederick v. Portland, 

162 F.R.D. 139, 142 (D. Or. 1995). “Costs related to depositions are generally available to a 

prevailing party.” Frederick, 162 F.R.D. at 142 (citing Wash. State Dep’t of Transp. V. Wash. 

Natural Gas Co., 51 F.3d 1489, 1501-02 (9th Cir. 1995)). The expenses associated with 

acquiring copies of depositions are recoverable, so long as the copies were “necessarily obtained 

for use in the case.” Alflex Corp. v. Underwriters Labs., Inc., 914 F.2d 175, 177 (9th Cir. 1990). 

The “deposition need not be absolutely indispensable to justify an award of costs; rather, it must 

only be reasonably necessary at the time it was taken, without regard to later developments that 

may eventually render the deposition unneeded at the time of trial or summary deposition.”

Frederick, 162 F.R.D. at 143 (citation omitted) (explaining that courts typically prohibit the 

recovery of deposition costs when the deposition was purely investigative in nature or solely for 

the convenience of counsel). 

Case 3:15-cv-01576-MO Document 289 Filed 12/06/16 Page 2 of 3
3 – OPINION AND ORDER 

CONCLUSION 

I find the deposition of Mr. Creal was reasonably necessary at the time it was taken, and 

the costs associated with his deposition should be awarded to Defendants as requested in the 

Bills of Costs [281, 282, 283]. Because Grouped Defendants failed to provide evidence to 

support a finding that the costs associated with the depositions of Bruce McKee and Terry Ross, 

or the rushed copy of the trial transcript were reasonably necessary, those costs are not awarded. 

Accordingly, I GRANT in PART Grouped Defendants’ Bill of Costs [283] and award costs in 

the amount of $2,387.51; I GRANT Defendant Creekside Valley Farms, LLC’s Bill of Costs 

[281] and award costs in the amount of $489.30; I GRANT Defendant KCK Farms, LLC’s Bill 

of Costs [282] and award costs in the amount of $489.30. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: This ______ day of December, 2016. 

MICHAEL W. MOSMAN 

Chief United States District Judge

6th

/s/ Michael W. Mosman

Case 3:15-cv-01576-MO Document 289 Filed 12/06/16 Page 3 of 3