 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Young v. State11/28/2000
Third District, Salt Lake The Honorable James S. Sawaya
Plaintiff appeals from a final judgment of the trial court ordering her to pay defendant hospital's costs following plaintiff's unsuccessful action against the hospital for medical malpractice. We reverse and remand.
BACKGROUND
On August 31, 1994, plaintiff entered the University of Utah hospital to have labor induced. Plaintiff's labor did not progress adequately, and a cesarean section was performed. Plaintiff delivered a healthy baby but experienced complications after delivery that resulted in a hysterectomy. Plaintiff subsequently brought an action against the hospital for medical malpractice.
Pursuant to stipulation, the matter was tried to the court without a jury. The court ruled against plaintiff and in favor of the hospital. The hospital filed a memorandum of costs and a cost affidavit, seeking reimbursement for costs and expenses associated with defending plaintiff's action. The trial court entered a judgment for costs in favor of the hospital. Plaintiff appeals.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
This court has consistently held that a trial court's decision to award the prevailing party its costs will be reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. See, e.g., Pennington v. Allstate Ins. Co., 973 P.2d 932, 939 (Utah 1998) ("we will affirm a trial court's award of costs unless the trial court abused its discretion"); Bd. of Comm'rs of the Utah State Bar v. Petersen, 937 P.2d 1263, 1267 (Utah 1997) ("The determination to award taxable costs is within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent an abuse of that discretion." (quoting Ong Int'l (U.S.A.) Inc. v. 11th Ave. Corp., 850 P.2d 447, 460 (Utah 1993)).
ANALYSIS
I. DEPOSITION COSTS
The trial court awarded the hospital costs for depositions the hospital took of plaintiff, plaintiff's family and friends, plaintiff's expert witness, and for copies the hospital obtained of depositions plaintiff took of the hospital's own doctors who attended to her. Plaintiff contends that the trial court exceeded the permitted range of discretion in awarding these costs because the hospital did not use the depositions at trial in place of live testimony.
The general rule regarding the recovery of deposition costs is that a party may recover deposition costs as long as the "`trial court is persuaded that [the depositions] were taken in good faith and, in the light of the circumstances, appeared to be essential for the development and presentation of the case.'" Highland Constr. Co. v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 683 P.2d 1042, 1051 (Utah 1984) (quoting Frampton v. Wilson, 605 P.2d 771, 774 (Utah 1980)). Plaintiff argues that under this rule, the hospital must have used the depositions at trial in order for the depositions to be taxable as costs. We disagree.
To be taxable as costs, depositions need not be used at trial, provided other criteria are met. In applying the general rule in Board of Commissioners of the Utah State Bar, we stated,
This is not to say that the costs of taking a deposition can never be recovered when the deposition is not used at trial. We have stated that "we would allow deposition costs as necessary and reasonable where the development of the case is of such a complex nature that discovery cannot be accomplished through the less expensive method of interrogatories, requests for admissions, and requests for the production of documents." 973 P.2d at 1272-73 (quoting Highland Constr. Co., 683 P.2d at 1051).
Thus, deposition costs can be recovered if the trial court determines that the deposit
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Utah Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|