Legal Document

379 U.S. 227 85 Supreme Court Reporter 411 13 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 248 Howard FARMER, Petitioner,v.ARABIAN AMERICAN OIL COMPANY. ARABIAN COMPANY, Petitioner, versus FARMER. Nos. 32, 33. Argued Nov. 9 and 10, 1964. Decided Dec. 14, Kalman I. Nulman, New York City, for petitioner in Number 32 respondent Chester Bordeau, Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The questions presented this case relate to power discretion a district court tax as costs against loser civil lawsuit expenses incurred by winner carrying on litigation. 2 Farmer, physician from Texas specializing ophthalmology, started litigation Arabian American Oil Company state court, claiming $4,000 damages1 breach an employment contract. complaint alleged that April 1955 company entered into agreement employ Farmer ophthalmologist Saudi Arabia at annual salary $16,000 plus living allowance per year, so long continued its oil-well operations there, although he began work properly performed his duties, wrongfully discharged him March 1956. On company's motion was removed federal because diversity. admitted it had employed but defended grounds discharge not wrongful both been will rather than definite term, good cause. At trial attempted show found number Americans contracted trachoma, much dreaded tropical eye disease which may lead blindness, urged medical staff falsify or suppress findings, refused do so. evidence tended disprove charge operated young boy's eye, without first having received examined urinalysis blood test report. This be violation written rule standard surgical practice. Such tests fact completed before Dr. operation, whether known their results, there actually requiring have results were sharp dispute. 3 company, order refute Farmer's charge, brought three witnesses testify support version jury failed agree, after District Judge Palmieri granted directed verdict, 176 F.Supp. 45, approved clerk's taxation amount $6,601.08, included among other things transportation daily stenographic transcripts record furnished lawyers request. Holding verdict should directed, Appeals reversed remanded new trial, thereby upsetting judgment costs. Cir., 277 Federal Reporter, 2nd 46. 4 remand obtained directing put up security sum $6,000. Because unable post large bond, MacMahon dismissed case. strongly indicated belief already taxed exorbitant require give bond would 'for all practical purposes' deny day court. 285 720. second time Weinfeld, no appeal taken. clerk then $11,900.12 aggregate cost trials, review Weinfeld these 'staggering' uncomplicated reduced them $831.60. In making reduction, lowered bill $6,601.08 $496.05. He did chiefly eliminating supplying counsel with overnight proceedings. also reimburse similar trial. 31 F.R.D. 191. Sitting en banc, Appeals, vote 5—4, affirmed 'Weinfeld's held proper deference Palmieri's part order. itself, however, $2,064 two Arabia, who 'occupied otherwise empty space planes regularly scheduled flights actual travel expense none allowed.' 324 359, 364. 5 petitioned certiorari Appeals' refusal affirm Weinfeld's sought those parts refusing allow transporting We petitions, 376 942, 84 799, 11 766. For reasons stated, are wholly relied we agree upheld entirety. 6 deal contention bringing country. His argument runs way. It has law country, now set out Rule 45(e) Rules Civil Procedure,2 that, exceptions here relevant, subpoenas attendance cannot served outside judicial more 100 miles place Many decisions courts appeals since compelled under miles, party persuades paying adversary.3 view dissenting judges below. 365. majority, while recognizing great bulk authority supports 100-mile rule, nevertheless discretionary such 28 Code KF62 § 1920(3) (1958 ed.), provides '(a) judge * (f)ees disbursements *.' majority thought prior undercut 1949 congressional amendment 1821 'witnesses required Continental States, shall entitled 7 accept either extreme position old vitality any purpose can never circumstances miles. case, where is being denied, need specific nor mark precisely limits court's them. sufficient point Procedure 54(d), 'Except when express provision therefor made statute rules, allowed course prevailing unless directs While could far what 'costs allowed,' words 'unless directs' quite plainly vest some 'costs.' therefore hold correct treating discretion. II. 8 held, argues here, even if discretion, error undertake 'an independent determination de novo trial.' F.2d, agree. Since upset reversal judgment, became duty trials only finally company. accepted former same figures. assessment, responsibility decide question himself, exercise called for, control. True, like situation almost surely hope brother judge's opinion, idea aware intervening known, example opinions following one mentioned questions. And lowering assessment reached result greatly different itself $2,000. III. Finally, think appropriate stand. disputed most important principle largest (a) approximately $3,000 stenographers' fees (b) $7,000 back Arabia. 10 denying transcripts, pointed might added convenience perhaps task easier, means indispensable. conclusion based personal knowledge complicated extended submit briefs proposed findings. As transcript justified read them, correctly accomplished common practice calling stenographer notes. make pay ordered counsel, disturbed Appeals. 'in discretion' limiting diem fixed distance exceed courthouse. undoubtedly influenced extent long-standing rule. That think, necessary consideration exercising field. century-and-a-half-old special statutory provision4 relating service courthouse designed protect harassment long, tiresome trips also, line our national policy, minimize litigation, policy emphasized Procedure.5 Here own, notice foreign own expense. With reference this, said: 12 'Upon motion, obtaining testimony witness rested which, imposed conditions respect initially bear provided ultimate favor party.' 191, 195. Having bring problem attention manner, went ahead piled understandably referred 'huge costs.' circumstances, charged improper vested 54(d). giving unrestrained winning litigant every seen fit incur conduct Items parties always given careful scrutiny. Any too movement direction systems jurisprudence, willing, indeed anxious, high discourage litigants lawsuits, matter how meritorious they faith believe claims be. Therefore, sparingly exercised specifically statute. restrained administration harmony reducing insofar possible burdensome assessing accordingly affirmed. ordered. 14 Judgment 15 GOLDBERG, concurring result. 16 & N Immigration Nationality Decisions abuse trials. issues, found, extraordinarily length, decision really seems me entirely correct, let alone erroneous constitute likewise aside judgment. Also, believed beyond '100-mile limit,' allowances defendant's equivalent mileage 17 But limit narrow lower exercise. depart strong precedents long-continued custom limitation uniformly observed departed taxing 18 Judges Smith, Clark, Hays, point, stated persuasive compelling. Smith succinctly summarized rationale dissenters stating 19 'not breaks overwhelming weight authority, creates cases admiralty, appears admit, abandons traditional scheme turn English unsuccessful opponent's well own. accident must save minimal costs, deliberate choice ensure access effectively denied moderate means.' 20 No undue burden upon depositions taken live pending. If feels appearance necessary, reasonable involved. 21 application violates sound shown very Two able experienced applying came opposite rule; learned divided issue. fear certainty uniformity treatment item, heretofore prevailed throughout system, spawn considerable seeking holds courts. type consuming expensive further add burdens heavy. Moreover, unduly prolong over decided final entered. 22 defendant, probability, seriously raised issue, light uniform position, enactment proviso ed.). But, demonstrated, nothing 'the eventual recovery 367. enacted request Attorney General obtain lowest first-class rate financial sacrifice part. S. Rep. 187, 81st Cong., 1st Sess. Furthermore, doubtful applies face limited between Territories possessions continental possessions. word 'required' used statute, statute's proponent General, susceptible interpretation deemed applicable coming abroad, subject subpoena situations 1783 ed.)1 23 54(d) lends Court's conclusion. adoption framing amending Rules, 'costs' interpreted referring providing normally awarded litigant.2 24 reasons, adhere formulation forth Ninth Circuit 'mileage allowable traveled within district, whichever greater.' Kemart Corporation Printing Arts Research Laboratories, Inc., 232 897, 904, 57 Law Reports, 1234. 25 Even today, 'represents approach us conviction 'favored wealthy penalized losing party." 370. 26 Learned Hand once observed: 'After dozen years experience say dread suit anything else short sickness death.'3 27 intensify dread. HARLAN, whom STEWART joins, dissenting. 29 justification settle deprives traveling reasonably places distance. Court, declines precise holding question. scope acting powers, foundation today's decision, my left appeals. below Chief Lumbard 359. By successive amendments several later, amended claim, first, $59,683, finally, $160,000. that: 'A hearing specified See cited below, 362, dissent, 366, collected Annotated KF65 U5 1821, n. 4, Fed.Code Ann. 1821. Statutes-at-Large 88 (1789); 335 (1793). See, e.g., 'shall construed secure just, speedy, inexpensive action.' (Emphasis supplied.) 1783(a) ed.) provides: A subpoena, it, citizen resident who: '(1) Has personally notified country appear thereof pursuant letters rogatory issued answer States; '(2) jurisdiction whose criminal proceeding desired General.' Authorities rules Professor Moore approve intimate departs way letter spirit Moore, Practice, 1362—1363. Address Hand, Association Bar City York, Lectures Legal Topics, 105 (1926).

Classification Label: 8