Fredericks v. Borden

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

NIGEL FREDERICKS,

Plaintiff, 9:17-cv-00015 (BKS/DJS)

v.

B. BORDEN,

Defendant.

Appearances: For Plaintiff: Erik T. Koons Baker Botts L.L.P. 700 K St. NW Washington, DC 20001

Angela L. Brown Baker Botts L.L.P. 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10010

William C. Lavery Dorothea R. Allocca Clifford Chance US L.L.P. 2001 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006

For Defendant: Letitia James New York State Attorney General Ryan W. Hickey Brittany M. Haner Assistant Attorneys General The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, Chief United States District Judge: MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arises from Plaintiff Nigel Fredericks’ claim that Defendant

B. Borden used excessive force while Plaintiff was incarcerated at Franklin Correctional Facility. (Dkt. No. 38, at 1, 4). In a Memorandum-Decision and Order entered on October 21, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions in part. (See generally Dkt. No. 190). The Court determined that an award of costs was an appropriate sanction to deter future misconduct, and to restore Plaintiff’s attorneys to the position they would be in but for Defendant’s belated disclosure of evidence. (Id. at 31-33). The Court ordered that Defendant shall bear the costs Plaintiff’s counsel incurred in connection with the continuance of trial and permitted Defendant to submit objections by November 4, 2024. (Id. at 33). Defendant did not submit objections to Plaintiff’s request. II. COSTS

An award of costs may “include those reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by attorneys and ordinarily charged to their clients.” LeBlanc-Sternberg v. Fletcher, 143 F.3d 748, 763 (2d Cir. 1998) (quoting U.S. Football League v. Nat’l Football League, 887 F.2d 408, 416 (2d Cir. 1989)). Attorneys’ expenditures on litigation are unnecessary and non-compensable when “they exceed the minimum that a reasonable paying client would pay absent a fee-shifting arrangement.” Grant v. Syracuse, 357 F. Supp. 3d 180, 208 (quoting Amerisource Corp. v. Rx USA Int’l Inc., 2010 WL 2160017, at *15, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52424, at *46 (E.D.N.Y. May 26, 2010)). Here, Plaintiff claims that his counsel “incurred various nonrefundable and out-of-pocket expenses related to preparations for the trial date that was adjourned.” (Dkt. No. 186-1, at 1). These expenses include $3,937.68 for equipment rental and labor, $2,554.74 for technician labor, $114.00 for a train ticket, and $18.43 for an Uber. (Dkt. No. 186-1, at 2), for a total of $6,624.85. Plaintiff has submitted a declaration by counsel, receipts, and invoices in support of this request. (Dkt. Nos. 186-1; 186-4 to 186-7). Defendant does not argue that the costs sought are unreasonable or otherwise inappropriate. Upon examination, the Court finds the application for costs and expenses to be reasonable. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiff's request for $6,624.85 in costs. Wl. CONCLUSION For these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff is awarded $6,624.85 in costs. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 13, 2024 Syracuse, New York PAAR ha. Canta Brenda K. Sannes Chief U.S. District Judge