[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-13128 JUNE 29, 2006
Non-Argument Calendar THOMAS K. KAHN
________________________ CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 97-01915-CV-JLK
MICHAEL PEREZ,
Plaintiff-Appellant
Cross-Appellee,
versus
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,
Defendant-Appellee
Cross-Appellant,
WILLIAM ALLSBURY,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(June 29, 2006)
Before BARKETT and WILSON, Circuit Judges, and CONWAY*, District Judge.
_____________________________
* Honorable Anne C. Conway, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida,
sitting by designation.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Perez appeals the district court’s award of costs to Miami-Dade
County (“County”) after the district court granted summary judgment in the
County’s favor. Perez makes the following arguments on appeal. First, he
contends that the County failed to comply with the rules of the district court when
it failed to timely file any document in support of its initial motion to tax costs and
by failing to support its request with particularity. Second, Perez claims that the
district court awarded thousands of dollars of costs not permitted pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1920. Finally, he argues that the district court’s grant of summary
judgment in the underlying appeal should be reversed, and therefore, the district
court’s award of costs to the County should be vacated.
The County argues that the district court’s award of costs should be
affirmed. However, the County cross-appeals the district court’s determination of
the award, claiming that the district court employed the incorrect standard in
denying the award of the trial transcript and two deposition transcripts. The
County concedes, however, that if we reverse summary judgment in the underlying
appeal, the award of costs should be vacated.
Rule 54(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that “costs other
than attorneys’ fees shall be allowed as of course to the prevailing party unless the
2
court otherwise directs.” “Absent a contrary legislative directive, a ‘prevailing
party’ is one who prevails on ‘any significant issue’ and thereby achieves some of
the benefits sought by bringing suit.” Loggerhead Turtle v. County Council of
Volusia County, Fla., 307 F.3d 1318, 1323 n.4 (11th Cir. 2002) (quoting Tex. State
Teachers Ass’n v. Garland Indep. Sch. Dist., 489 U.S. 782, 791-92, 109 S. Ct.
1486, 1493, 103 L. Ed. 2d 866 (1989)).
Here, we reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of
the County in the underlying substantive appeal. Perez v. Miami-Dade County,
No. 05-10261 (11th Cir. Feb. 17, 2006) (per curiam). This being the case, the
County is no longer the prevailing party for purposes of Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 54(d). Therefore, we vacate the district court’s award of costs in favor
of the County.
VACATED.
3