Kalitta Air L.L.C. v. Cent. Texas Airborne Sys., No. 13-15015 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseKalitta filed suit against numerous defendants, including CTAS, alleging various causes of action stemming from the modification of two of its aircraft from passenger to cargo planes. In this appeal, Kalitta challenged the district court's award of costs to CTAS following a jury's unanimous verdict in favor of CTAS. The court reversed the district court's award of costs for the pro hac vice admission of CTAS's counsel; reversed the district court's award of costs for editing and synchronizing deposition videotapes; and affirmed the court's award of costs for graphics consultants and the 2002 costs award.
Court Description: Costs. The panel affirmed in part, and reversed in part, the district court’s award of costs following a unanimous jury verdict in favor of defendant. The panel held that the district court erred in awarding $1,310 in costs for the fees that defendant’s counsel paid to be admitted to the Northern District of California on a pro hac vice basis because 28 U.S.C. § 1920(1) does not allow for an award of pro hac vice fees as taxable costs. The panel also held that the costs of deposition editing and synchronizing were not authorized by § 1920, and therefore reversed the district court’s award of costs associated with those services. Finally, the panel affirmed the district court’s award to defendant for costs for retainers and fees for graphics consultants, and costs awarded following the first jury trial in 2002.
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.