Opinion ID: 2536393
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: whether the circuit court erred in awarding any costs to prudential.

Text: ¶ 6. Mississippi Rule of Appellate Procedure 36 provides, in pertinent part: If a judgment is reversed, costs shall be taxed against the appellee unless otherwise ordered. Miss. R.App. P. 36(a). This Court has the discretion to deny costs in whole or in part to a prevailing party. Id.; see also N. Elec. Co. v. Phillips, 673 So.2d 1384, 1385 (Miss.1996). Our appellate rules create a presumption favoring the award of costs to the prevailing party. N. Elec. Co., 673 So.2d at 1385. Rarely has a prevailing party been denied costs in the absence of a showing of vexatious conduct on their part or that the losing party is incapable of paying the costs. Id.
¶ 7. Prudential seeks recovery for costs of its appeal bond premiums as well as costs associated with the circuit clerk preparing the appellate record. The trial court awarded these costs in the amount of $491,428.50. In Stewart's Response of Plaintiffs in Opposition to Motion to Tax All Costs to Plaintiffs, to Enter Judgment in Favor of Prudential for Same and to Issue Execution for Costs, Stewart asserted before the trial court an inability to pay, alleging that payment of costs would bankrupt some members of the Stewart family. ... Stewart, however, offered no evidence to support this assertion. In Stewart's Amended Response before the trial court, Stewart withdrew the argument that the family and the estate were unable to pay the costs. Nonetheless, before this Court, Stewart makes assertions throughout the appellant's brief that this assessment of costs will bankrupt the estate. ¶ 8. We find that Stewart has waived the argument of inability to pay the costs by excluding it from the Amended Response. This Court has held that issues that are not raised at the trial court and which the trial court had no opportunity to rule on cannot be raised for the first time in the appellate court. Corporate Mgmt., Inc. v. Greene County, 23 So.3d 454, 462 (Miss. 2009) (citing Fitch v. Valentine, 959 So.2d 1012, 1021 (Miss.2007)). Stewart had the burden of proof to make a showing of special circumstances but failed to present any evidence in support of this assertion. Accordingly, because the inability-to-pay argument was not presented to the trial court, the trial court had no opportunity to consider this factor in its determination of costs. See also Alexander v. Daniel, 904 So.2d 172, 183 (Miss.2005).
¶ 9. Prudential secured a supersedeas bond in the amount of 125% of the total judgment under Mississippi Rule of Appellate Procedure 8(a) in order to stay execution on the judgment. The bond provided for 8% interest each year for an estimated two years, from June 15, 2006, to June 15, 2008. The costs awarded to Prudential totaled $491,428.50, including both the cost of the bond premiums and the costs assessed Prudential by the Hinds County Circuit Court, which stemmed from preparing the record for appeal. ¶ 10. There is no evidence of vexatious conduct on the part of Prudential. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in awarding costs to Prudential. Since we find this issue to have no merit, the issue thus becomes whether it was necessary for Prudential to continue to maintain and pay the bond costs through June 2008, given that this Court issued the mandate on December 20, 2007. We analyze this question as part of Issue II.