ALOYSIA WOOD AND DANIEL WOOD, APPELLANTS,
v.
WALT DISNEY WORLD CO., D/B/A DISNEY WORLD, INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, A PENNSYLVANIA CORPORATION, ROUSE BRAKE & WHEEL INC., AND MERLIN, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY CO., A CONNECTICUT CORPORATION, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Walt Disney World Co. and its insurer appealed a cost judgment, challenging the trial court's award of transcript copying costs to the prevailing appellants. The court held that while appellants can recover the cost of their own transcript copy, they cannot recover costs for copies provided to opposing parties.
A prevailing party is entitled to have the cost of its own transcript copy assessed as costs against the opponent, but cannot recover the cost of transcript copies provided to other opposing parties. The designating party initially bears transcription costs, but if successful on appeal, may tax the cost of its own copy against the opponent.
[1] A designating party who prevails on appeal is entitled to recover the cost of their copy of the transcript.
[2] The cost of a copy of a transcript for use by an appellee is not recoverable as a cost against the opposing party.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Costs of the original and all copies of the transcript of proceedings shall be borne initially by the designating party, subject to appropriate taxation of costs as prescribed by Rule 9.400.”
Establishes the rule governing who initially bears transcription costs and how they may be taxed on appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court awarded appellants Wood costs totaling $7,490.82, including the cost of a transcript copy for appellants' use and a copy provided to o…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Taxation Of Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellees, Walt Disney World Co. and Insurance Company of North America, pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.400(c), seek review of a cost judgment against them in the sum of $7,490.82, and argue that the trial court erred in awarding appellants the costs of a copy of the transcript for use by appellants and a copy for use by appellees Rouse, Brake & Wheel, Inc., Merlin, Inc., and Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. Appellants concede that the trial court erred in awarding the cost of the latter copy1 but contend the cost of the appellant’s copy was properly assessed. We agree.
At the time we decided Akers v. Palm Beach Newspaper, Inc., 373 So. 2d 926, 929 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979) Fla.R.App.P. 9.200(b)(1) provided in part:
Costs of transcription shall be borne initially by the designating party, subject to appropriate taxation of costs as prescribed by Rule 9.400.
We said as to the above sentence:
[W]e conclude that ‘transcription’ as used in Rule 9.200(b)(1) means not only the original transcript but also includes sufficient copies for appellant and appellee.
As of January 1, 1981, the above quoted portion of Rule 9.200(b)(1) was amended to read:
Costs of the original and all copies of the transcript of proceedings shall be borne initially by the designating party, subject to appropriate taxation of costs as prescribed by Rule 9.400.
While we believe it appropriate to apply the rule as it existed when the notice of appeal was filed, the result would be the same under either version of the rule. The designating party is entitled to order a copy of the transcript for his use on appeal; and if he prevails, he is entitled to have his copy assessed as a cost against his opponent.
Accordingly, as to the sum of $1,388.25, being the cost of the copy of the transcript furnished by appellants to appel-lees, Rouse Brake & Wheel, Inc., Merlin, Inc. and Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co., we grant the motion for review and vacate that portion of the cost judgment. The balance of the motion is denied.
GRANTED IN PART; DENIED IN PART.
MOORE, GLICKSTEIN and HURLEY, JJ., concur. . On appeal, the final judgment for appellees, Rouse Brake & Wheel, Inc., Merlin, Inc. and Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. was affirmed.