Opinion
C.A. No. 05C-05-018WLW.
Submitted: March 22, 2007.
Decided: June 28, 2007.
Upon Plaintiffs' Motion to Assess Costs and Expert Witness Fees.
Granted in part; Denied in part.
Nicholas H. Rodriguez, Esquire, Schmittinger and Rodriguez, P.A., Dover, Delaware; attorneys for the Plaintiffs.
Brian T. McNelis, Esquire, Young McNelis, Dover, Delaware; attorneys for the Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiffs Donna L Stanley and Thurmon James Stanley filed a Motion for Costs and Expert Witness Fees pursuant to Superior Court Civil Rule 54 and 10 Del. C.§ 5101. Plaintiffs successfully achieved a jury verdict against the Defendants in the amount of $22,500.00 in compensatory damages on February 14, 2007. Plaintiffs seek the following costs in connection with the favorable jury verdict entered on their behalf:
a) Prothonotary Filing Fees $ 175.00 b) Sheriff of Kent County $ 60.00 c) Expert Witness Fee paid to Dr. Glen D. Rowe for his video trial deposition $ 1,000.00 d) Videotaping of Dr. Rowe's trial deposition (Wilcox Fetzer) $ 495.00 e) Expert Witness Fee paid to Dr. George Schreppler for his video trial deposition $ 525.00 f) Videotaping of Dr. Schreppler's trial deposition (Wilcox Fetzer) $ 500.00 g) Transcript of Dr. Rowe's trial deposition $ 373.00 h) Transcript of Dr. Schreppler's trial deposition $ 305.60 I) Transcript of Dr. Piccioni's trial Deposition $ 94.08Accordingly, Plaintiffs request that costs and expert witness fees be awarded in the amount of $3,527.68. Defendants' do not dispute Plaintiffs' application for costs set forth in (a), (b), (d), (e) and (f) above. These costs total $1,755.00 and will be assessed against the Defendants forthwith. However, Defendants contest the costs sought in (c), (g), (h) and (I) above.
Defendants in this action are Joshua J. Vanarsdall and James T. Campbell.
Discussion
Defendants dispute Plaintiffs' application for costs regarding the transcripts of Dr. Rowe's trial deposition (g) and Dr. Schreppler's trial deposition (h). Both of these physicians served as experts for Plaintiffs. The two costs are for the transcription of the Experts' trial depositions. Defendants argue that these costs are duplicative and not recoverable under Rule 54, because the video depositions of both Dr. Rowe and Dr. Schreppler were entered into evidence.
"Awarding costs for the videotaping of a deposition introduced at trial and the preparation of the transcript are duplicative, and therefore both are not permitted." Therefore, the costs for transcripts of the Experts' video depositions (which were entered into evidence) are duplicative, and the costs are not recoverable.
Gress v. Viola, 2007 WL 1748657, *2 (Del.Super.) citing Cimino v. Cherry, 2001 Del. Super. LEXIS 181, *9.
Defendants also contest Plaintiffs' application for costs regarding the transcript of Dr. Piccioni's trial deposition (i). Dr. Piccioni was an expert retained by the Defendants. Dr. Piccioni's trial testimony was proffered by way of reading-in the Expert's deposition and the transcript was offered into evidence by the Defendant. Therefore, the cost of the transcript of Dr. Piccioni's trial deposition is not recoverable.
Finally, Defendants contest Plaintiffs' application for an expert witness fee of $1,000.00 to be paid to Dr. Rowe for his video trial deposition (c). Defendants argue that the $1,000 .00 fee is un reasonabl e, because t he Physician's video tape deposition, dated June 22, 2006, was less than one hour in length. Defendants also note that Dr. Schreppler's trial deposition, on behalf of Plaintiffs, was similar in length to Dr. Rowe's deposition and generated compensation to Doctor Schreppler of only $525.00.
Defendants do not dispute Plaintiffs' application of $525.00 for the fee paid to Dr. Schreppler.
"Although there are no fixed formulas for determining reasonable expert fees, this Court has been striving for some uniformity in the setting of such costs." "To achieve this, the Court has previously relied upon a study performed in 1995 by the Medical Society of Delaware's Medico-Legal Affairs Committee." The study gave the following guidelines for expert witness fees: "`[A] reasonable range of fees for court appearances was from $1,300.00 to $1,800.00 per half day. For depositions a range of $500.00 to $900.00 for a two hour deposition was given as a guideline with a $159.00 to $250.00 charge for each additional hour.'" "In previous cases, the Court has adjusted those 1995 figures by adding a percentage increase based on the medical care price index available from the U.S. Bureau of Statistics." "The appropriate increase here is 43.9 percent, which was calculated using the sum of the percentage increases in the medical index from the beginning of 1996 through February 2007." "The adjusted figures are: $1,870.00 to $2,590.20 per half day for court appearances, and $719.50 to $1,295.10 for a two-hour deposition with a $228.80 to $359.75 charge for each additional hour."
Foley v. Elkton Plaza Ass., LLC, 2007 WL 959521, *2 (Del.Super.).
Id.
Id. citing Lurch v. Roberts, 2001 WL 238158, *1 (Del.Super.) quoting the Meidco-Legal Study.
Id.
Id. This Court decided Foley in March 2007. The Foley Court's calculations regarding expert witness fees is therefore relevant to the case sub judice.
Id.
Dr. Rowe's video deposition, which was offered into evidence at trial, was slightly less than one hour in duration. The Doctor did not make a court appearance. A reasonable fee for a two-hour deposition, under the adjusted figures above, is between $719.50 and $1,295.10. Accordingly, a reasonable fee for a one-hour deposition would be $359.75 to $647.55. One thousand dollars ($1000.00) is an unreasonable expert witness fee for Dr. Rowe. The Court finds that $525.00, which is identical to Plaintiffs' application for costs regarding Dr. Schreppler's compensation, is a reasonable expert fee for Dr. Rowe.
In addition to the uncontested $1,755.00 that Plaintiffs' request, Plaintiffs are also entitled to an expert witness fee of $525.00 for Dr. Rowe. Therefore, Plaintiffs are entitled to a total of $2,280.00.
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs' Motion to Assess Costs and Expert Witness Fees is granted in part and denied in part.
IT IS SO ORDERED.