Utilisave, LLC v. Khenin
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
EFiled: Jul 15 2016 04:28PM EDT Transaction ID 59286611 Case No. 7796-MZ COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 417 S. State Street Dover, Delaware 19901 Telephone: (302) 739-4397 Facsimile: (302) 739-6179 JOSEPH R. SLIGHTS III VICE CHANCELLOR July 15, 2016 John G. Harris, Esquire Berger Harris LLP 1105 North Market Street, Suite 1100 Wilmington, DE 19801 Re: Mr. Mikhail Khenin 1561 East 12th Street Brooklyn, NY 11230 mykhenin@gmail.com Utilisave, LLC v. Khenin C.A. No. 7796-MZ (VCS) Date Submitted: July 11, 2016 Dear Mr. Khenin and Mr. Harris: I am in receipt of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Costs in Accordance with Court of Chancery Rule 54(d). The motion is denied without prejudice. According to Exhibit A to the motion, Plaintiffs are seeking to have the Court tax as costs to the Defendant items that are not taxable under the rule including, as non–exhaustive examples: photocopying costs – Hutchinson v. Fish Eng’g Corp., 204 A.2d 752 (Del. Ch. 1964); travel expenses – Id.; court transcript fees – Foley v. Elkton Plaza, LLC, 2007 WL 959521 (Del. Super. Mar. 30, 2007); courier services – Kuratle Cont., Inc. v. Linden Green Cond. Assoc., 2014 WL 5391291 (Del. Super. Oct. 22, 2014); and computerized legal research – Pharmathene, Inc. v. Siga Tech., Inc., Utilisave, LLC v. Khenin C.A. No. 7796-MZ (VCS) July 15, 2016 Page 2 2012 WL 2146000 (Del. Ch. May 31, 2012). If Plaintiffs choose to re-file their motion, they must break down their costs by category and cite appropriate authority as support for their position that the Court may tax such items as costs against the Defendant. IT IS SO ORDERED. Very truly yours, /s/ Joseph R. Slights III JRSIII/cap cc: Register in Chancery-K
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
