Summary
noting that while the burden of establishing entitlement to costs for copies lies with the prevailing party, the prevailing party need not make “an accounting for each photocopy because that would make it impossible economically to recover those expenses.”
Summary of this case from Barrera v. Weiss & Woolrich S.Opinion
CASE NO: 8:98-cv-2237-T-23TGW.
December 19, 2006
ORDER
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 6.01(b), a September 6, 2005, order (Doc. 366) referred the plaintiffs' unopposed motion for attorney fees (Doc. 360-1) and Deborah Austin's ("Austin") motion for attorney fees (Doc. 363) to the United States Magistrate Judge for a report and recommendation. Following the Magistrate Judge's November 14, 2006, report and recommendation (Doc. 397), Austin objects (Doc. 398) and the plaintiffs respond (Doc. 399).
A de novo determination of those portions of the report and recommendation to which Austin objects reveals that the objections either are unfounded or otherwise require no different resolution of the plaintiff's motion to dismiss. Accordingly, Austin's objections (Doc. 398) are OVERRULED and the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation (Doc. 397) is ADOPTED. The plaintiffs' unopposed motion for attorney fees (Doc. 360-1) is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment (1) in favor of the plaintiffs and against Adam Reiser in the amount of $710,533.00 for attorney fees and (2) in favor of the plaintiffs and against Deborah Austin and Adam Reiser in the amount of $25,113.97 for costs. Austin's motion for attorney fees (Doc. 363) is DENIED.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida.