Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision The rule providing for taxing the costs for depositions does not include taxing the cost of copies of depositions. FACTS:Appellant, Patricia Shaikh, sued appellee, Aerovias de Mexico (Aeromexico), for damages, alleging unlawful retaliation and sexual harassment after Shaikh was terminated from her employment as a station manager for Aeromexico. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Aeromexico on Shaikh’s claims and ordered that Aeromexico recover $4,960.65 in costs. The order awarding costs included the costs of taking depositions, including videotaped depositions, obtaining copies of deposition transcripts and videotapes, making copies of litigation documents, and the airfare for Aeromexico’s counsel to attend the deposition of Bomberg in Spain. Shaikh appeals, challenging the summary judgment and the post-judgment order awarding costs. HOLDING:Judgment affirmed. Order awarding costs reversed. In her second point of error, Shaikh challenges the order awarding costs. Shaikh claims that the costs awarded for 1. additional copies of pleadings, not required by law; 2. videotaped depositions; and 3. airfare for Aeromexico’s counsel to attend the deposition of Bomberg in Spain are not authorized by statute or common law. The costs awarded by the trial court were based on a document titled, “Defendant’s Bill of Costs,” which was prepared by Aeromexico’s counsel and attached to Aeromexico’s motion for entry of order of costs. The trial court awarded costs of $4,960.65, as requested. Under �31.007(b) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, a court may include in any order or judgment all costs, including, 1. fees of the clerk and service fees due the county; 2. fees of the court reporter for the original of stenographic transcripts necessarily obtained for use in the suit; 3. masters, interpreters and guardians ad litem appointed pursuant to the rules and state statutes; and 4. such other costs and fees as may be permitted by the rules and state statutes. Rule 140 of the Rules of Civil Procedure restricts the cost of copies to be assessed against a party to those copies required by law or the rules. Rule 141, however, provides that “the court may, for good cause, to be stated on the record, adjudge the costs otherwise than as provided by law or by these rules.” “Costs” usually refers to fees and charges required by law to be paid to the courts or some of their officers, and the amount is fixed by statute or the court’s rules. “Costs, within the meaning of Rules 125 through 149 are those items in the clerk’s bill of costs.” The allocation of costs is a matter for the trial court’s discretion and cannot be overturned on appeal except for an abuse of discretion. However, the issue in this case is not the allocation of costs, but the assessment of costs. Generally, in Texas, expenses incurred in prosecuting or defending a lawsuit are not recoverable as costs, unless permitted by a statute or equitable principle. The costs of taking and filing a deposition are recoverable. Shenandoah Assocs. v. J & K Props., 741 S.W.2d 470 (Tex. App. � Dallas 1987, writ denied). However, the rule providing for taxing the costs for depositions does not include taxing the cost of copies of depositions. In addition, travel costs are not included. The copies of deposition transcripts, videotapes and litigation documents listed in Aeromexico’s Bill of Costs are not required by law and are part of the expenses of litigation. Therefore, they are not properly taxable as costs. If any of the deposition costs listed in Aeromexico’s Bill of Costs were the court reporter’s charges for preparing the original deposition transcript, a certificate as required by rule 203.2(f) should have been filed with the Harris County District Clerk. The court affirms the judgment of the trial court. It reverses the post-judgment order awarding costs and remands the cause for the award of costs consistent with this opinion. OPINION:Nuchia, J.; Hedges, Nuchia and Higley, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.