Taxable Costs

PRE-2024 COMMITTEE NOTE

Local Civil Rule 54.1 serves a very useful purpose by outlining what costs are and are

not taxable unless otherwise ordered by the Court. This is a subject that is not addressed

with specificity by 28 U.S.C. § 1920 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1). Local Civil Rule 54.1 has

been updated with the valuable assistance of the Clerks of the two Courts to reflect

more precisely which costs are and are not taxable without an order of the Court.

[August 2014 Note]: Local Rule 54.1 is modified to indicate that the Bill of Costs, and

any objection thereto, shall be filed via ECF (except for Pro Se parties) in both Districts.

[July 2013 Note]: The seven-day notice period previously set forth in Local Civil Rule

54.1(a) was in conflict with the 14-day notice period provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1)

and the Committee recommends that the Local Rule be changed to conform with Rule

54(d)(1). Instead of prescribing a particular time period (which might be changed by a

future amendment to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54), the Committee recommends that the Local

Rule refer the reader to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54. The term “request to tax costs” has misled

some parties into not realizing that they need to file a notice of taxation of costs

specifying the date and time of taxation. For this reason, the Committee recommends

that Local Civil Rule 54.1(a) be amended to substitute the term “notice of taxation of

24

Joint Local Rules, S.D.N.Y. and E.D.N.Y. Effective January 2, 2026

costs” for the term “request to tax costs”, and to add an explicit requirement that the

notice specify the date and time fixed for taxation.

Local Civil Rule 54.1(a) presently provides that costs will not be taxed during the

pendency of an appeal. At the suggestion of the Clerk’s Offices, the Committee

recommends that the Rule be amended to provide that costs will likewise not be taxed

during the pendency of a motion for reconsideration or a motion for a new trial. Also, at

the suggestion of the Clerk’s Offices, the Committee recommends that the Rule be

amended to provide that the party seeking to tax costs shall file a new notice of taxation

of costs within 30 days after the determination of any appeal, motion for

reconsideration, or motion for a new trial.

At the suggestion of the Eastern District Clerk’s Office, the Committee recommends that

Local Civil Rule 54.1(b) be amended to place parties on notice that, in the Eastern

District, the parties need not appear at the date and time scheduled for taxation.

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(1) remain unchanged. It is

authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1920(2), which allows taxation of “fees for printed or

electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained for use in this case.”

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(2) remain unchanged. 28

U.S.C. § 1920 does not by its terms specifically address costs related to depositions.

However, the practice of taxing the expenses of a deposition when it is received in

evidence or employed on a successful motion for summary judgment is widespread and

can be regarded as authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1920(2) as “expenses for transcripts

necessarily obtained for use in this case.” See 10 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R.

Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2676 (3d ed. 1998) (“There is general agreement

that expenses of a deposition may be taxed as costs when it was received in evidence.”);

7 James WM. Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 54.103(3)(c)(i) (3d ed. 2011)

(Ҥ1920 also contains several provisions for the recovery of costs that, alone or in

conjunction, have been interpreted to permit the awarding of the routine expenses

incurred in taking depositions.”). See also Anderson v. City of New York, 132 F. Supp. 2d

239, 246 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (allowing deposition transcripts to be taxed as costs under §

1920).

25

Joint Local Rules, S.D.N.Y. and E.D.N.Y. Effective January 2, 2026

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(3) remain unchanged. This

subsection is authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1920(3), which allows taxation of “fees and

disbursements for printing and witnesses.”

The Committee recommends that the second sentence of Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(4) be

deleted in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, Ltd., 132

S. Ct. 1997 (2012). The rest of Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(4) is authorized by § 1920(6),

which allows taxation of “compensation of court appointed experts, compensation of

interpreters, and salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of special interpretation services”

under 28 U.S.C. § 1828.

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(5) remain unchanged. This

subsection is authorized by § 1920(4), which allows taxation of “fees for exemplification

and the costs of making copies of any materials where the copies are necessarily

obtained for use in this case.”

Courts in other circuits have begun to address the question whether and to what extent

the costs of electronic discovery can be taxed as costs of copying or exemplification. See,

e.g., Race Tires America, Inc. v. Hoosier Racing Tire Corp., 674 F.3d 158 (3d Cir. 2012).

Particularly in the absence of authoritative guidance from the Second Circuit on this

issue, the Committee has concluded that it is premature to address this question in

Local Civil Rule 54.1(c).

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(6) remain unchanged. This

subsection is authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4), which allows taxation of “fees for

exemplification and the costs of making copies of any materials where the copies are

necessarily obtained for use in this case.”

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(7) be retained, because it does

not authorize taxation of any costs, but instead serves a useful purpose by pointing out

that attorney’s fees are addressed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 and are not taxable except by

order of the Court. For the reasons explained in the Committee Note to Local Civil Rule

54.1(a), the Committee recommends that the Local Rule refer the reader to Fed. R. Civ.

P. 54 for the time period within which attorney’s fees must be sought.

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(8) remain unchanged.

Although 28 U.S.C. § 1920 does not by its terms address fees for masters, receivers, or

26

Joint Local Rules, S.D.N.Y. and E.D.N.Y. Effective January 2, 2026

commissioners, Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(g) authorizes the Court to allocate payment for a

master’s compensation, and commentators have observed that appropriate

expenditures incurred in connection with a special master may be taxed as costs by the

prevailing party. 10 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. §2677 (3d ed.).

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(9) remain unchanged. This

subsection is authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4), which allows a taxation of “fees for

exemplification and the costs of making copies of any materials where the copies are

necessarily obtained for use in this case.”

The Committee recommends that Local Civil Rule 54.1(c)(10) remain unchanged. This

subsection is authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1920(5), which allows taxation of docket fees

under 28 U.S.C. § 1923.

2024 COMMITTEE NOTE

In light of the withdrawal of Local Rule 30.1, a corresponding change has been made

here to remove attorney’s fees from the list of taxable costs.