breaking news

The Supreme Court on Thursday clarified a technical issue of civil proceedings, which may arise when a party seeks to recover certain litigation costs after a successful appeal. case, City of San Antonio v Hotels.comIt involves how the lower court decides the “cost” that the winning party can recover from the losing party.According to Justice Samuel Alito, the court Unanimous rule After the appellate court allocates the costs that the winning party can recover, the district court has no discretion to reduce the costs.

Case opened Rule 39 The Federal Appeal Procedure Rules, which define the types of expenses that the winning party can recover after an appeal is filed in the Federal Court.The winning party (Hotels.com) argued that the local court always All listed expenses incurred by the winning party must be compensated. The losing party of the appeal (San Antonio) argued that the district court should have the discretion not to determine all costs; for example, in this case, San Antonio refused to pay the $2 million Hotels.com spent on bonds during the appeal.

The court supported Hotels.com. “Article 39 gives the Court of Appeals discretion to allocate appeal costs,” Alito wrote. “After solving these, it is easy to understand why the district court cannot exercise the second-tier discretion.”

Please check back later for an in-depth analysis of comments.