IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
JAMES L. MARTIN )
)
Plaintiff, ) C.A. No. N13C-01-020 RRC
v. )
)
NATIONAL GENERAL )
ASSURANCE COMPANY )
)
Defendant. )
Submitted: September 2, 2014
Decided: November 3, 2014
Upon Defendant National General Assurance Company’s Motion for Costs.
GRANTED IN PART. DENIED IN PART.
ORDER
James L. Martin, pro se, Wilmington, Delaware.
David C. Malatesta, Jr., Esquire, Wilmington, Delaware, Attorney for
Defendant.
COOCH, R.J.
This 3rd day of November, 2014 it appears to the Court that:
1. Defendant National General Assurance Company seeks reimbursement
for costs incurred during the course of the presentation of its Motion for
Summary Judgment in the Superior Court and for costs incurred during
appeal to the Supreme Court of Delaware. 1 This Court entered an order
on September 27, 2013 denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary
1
For facts and procedural history not relevant to the instant motion, see Martin v. Nat'l Gen. Assur.
Co., 2014 WL 3408674 (Del. Jul. 9, 2014).
Judgment and granting Summary Judgment to Defendant. Plaintiff
appealed the order and the Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed this
Court, finding no merit in Plaintiff’s arguments on appeal. 2
2. Defendant now seeks reimbursement for the following costs: $50.00 for
court costs, $690.33 for the deposition transcript of Trooper Cocking,
which was attached as an exhibit to Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment, which was granted by this Court, and $142.15 for costs to
obtain copies of Plaintiff’s medical records. 3 Plaintiff disputes
Defendant’s contention that Plaintiff should be responsible for costs.
3. Pursuant to Superior Court Civil Rule 54(d) and 10 Del. C. § 5101, the
prevailing party in a civil action may recover costs against the adverse
party. 4 This Court finds that Defendant, as the prevailing party, is entitled
to a total of $192.15, representing the court costs and the costs incurred in
obtaining Plaintiff’s medical records. This Court further finds that
Defendant is not entitled to the $690.33 requested for the deposition
transcript costs, as they were not introduced into evidence at trial. 5
Therefore, Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED IN PART.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________
Richard R. Cooch, R.J.
cc: Prothonotary
2
See Martin v. Nat'l Gen. Assur. Co., 2014 WL 3408674 (Del. Jul. 9, 2014).
3
Defendant’s Motion was originally filed in 2013 when court costs amounted to $43.50. Plaintiff
appealed the grant of summary judgment to Defendant and the Motion for Costs was stayed pending
the appeal. Defendant’s reply includes the original amount of $43.50 plus $6.50 in statutory filing fees
incurred during the course of the appeal.
4
See 10 Del. C. §5101 (“Generally a party for whom final judgment in any civil action, or on a writ of
error upon a judgment is given in such action, shall recover, against the adverse party, costs of suit, to
be awarded by the court.”); Super. Ct. Civ. R. 54(d) (awarding costs to prevailing party as a matter of
course).
5
See Super. Ct. Civ. R. 54(f); See also DIGA v. Troise, 1992 WL 240352 (Del. Super. Sept. 14, 1992)
(finding depositions, when used for purpose of pretrial motions, are not “introduced into evidence”
under Rule 54(f)).
2