Bartunek v. Gentrup

• Decision Date: 27 May 1994
• Docket Number: No. S-92-875,S-92-875
• Citation: 246 Neb. 18,516 N.W.2d 253
• Parties: Randy L. BARTUNEK, Appellant, v. Michael J. GENTRUP, Appellee.
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

Page 253

516 N.W.2d 253

246 Neb. 18

Randy L. BARTUNEK, Appellant, v. Michael J. GENTRUP, Appellee.

No. S-92-875.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

May 27, 1994.

Syllabus by the Court

1. Appeal and Error. Regarding a question of law, an appellate court has an obligation to reach a conclusion independent of that of the trial court in a judgment under review.

2. Costs. The costs of litigation and expenses incident to litigation may not be

recovered unless provided for by a statute or a uniform course of procedure.

3. Expert Witnesses: Fees. A witness who testifies as an expert on a subject requiring special knowledge and skill is, in the absence of a contract for those services, entitled only to the statutory witness fee.

William G. Line, of Kerrigan & Line, Fremont, for appellant.

Thomas J. Culhane and Ruth W. Beyerhelm, of Erickson & Sederstrom, P.C., Omaha, for appellee.

HASTINGS, C.J., and WHITE, CAPORALE, FAHRNBRUCH, LANPHIER, and WRIGHT, JJ.

WRIGHT, Justice.

Randy L. Bartunek obtained a judgment against Michael J. Gentrup for injuries Bartunek suffered as the result of a motor vehicle accident. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Bartunek in the amount of $45,000. Bartunek moved for taxation of costs and expenses against Gentrup in the amount of $6,138. The trial court allowed only a portion of the costs, and Bartunek appeals.

SCOPE OF REVIEW

Regarding a question of law, an appellate court has an obligation to reach a conclusion independent of that of the trial court in a judgment under review. Jasa v. Douglas County, 244 Neb. 944, 510 N.W.2d 281 (1994).

FACTS

On January 12, 1991, Bartunek was a passenger in a vehicle which collided with a vehicle driven by Gentrup. Bartunek sustained injuries including a dislocated and fractured shoulder, a punctured lung, a torn ear, and a fractured foot. He sought compensation for medical bills in the amount of $13,706, lost earnings in the amount of $7,305, and loss of personal property in the amount of $675. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Bartunek in the amount of $45,000, and the trial court entered judgment for that amount. The trial court ordered that the amount of costs would be determined on Bartunek's motion for taxation of costs.

For his assignments of error, Bartunek has enumerated each of the following costs, and he assigns as error the trial court's refusal to tax such costs:

                Copy of Bartunek's deposition taken by Gentrup                        $   76.70
                Copies of depositions of a Dr. McKnight and Bartunek's wife, Nancy       108.80
                  Bartunek, both taken by Gentrup
                Copy of deposition of Dr. Harold Smith taken by Gentrup                   46.80
                Copy of video deposition of Dr. Timothy Fitzgibbons, Gentrup's            15.00
                  expert, taken by Gentrup
                Copy of transcript of Dr. Fitzgibbons' deposition                         64.10
                Expert witness fee of Dr. Jerome Sherman for projection of             1,030.00
                  Bartunek's economic loss, including trial testimony and mileage
                James Rogers, Midlands Rehabilitation Consultants, Bartunek's expert   1,067.65
                  for testimony concerning jobs that Bartunek could and could not
                  perform
                Karen Brown, Working Back Institute, Bartunek's expert on work           680.00
                  capacity evaluation
                Dr. Richard Bergstrom trial testimony as Bartunek's expert             1,800.00
                Deposition of Dr. Donald Gammel, Gentrup's expert, taken by Bartunek     300.00
                                                                                      ---------
                TOTAL COSTS                                                           $5,189.05
                

ANALYSIS

As a general rule, the costs of litigation and expenses incident to litigation may not be recovered unless provided for by a statute or a uniform course of procedure. Kliment v. National Farms, Inc., 245 Neb. 596, 514 N.W.2d 315 (1994); Gottsch Feeding Corp. v. Red Cloud Cattle Co., 229 Neb. 746, 429 N.W.2d 328 (1988).

We first dispose of assignments of error Nos. 1 through 5, which deal with the costs for copies of depositions taken by Gentrup. Bartunek has not cited or referred to a statute or a uniform course of procedure which would support his claim for these costs. See id. Assignments of error Nos. 1 through 5 are without merit.

Assignments of error Nos. 6 through 9 deal with expert witness fees charged by Bartunek's witnesses. Dr. Jerome Sherman testified concerning a projection of the economic loss suffered by Bartunek. Dr. Sherman relied upon a report by James Rogers, a rehabilitation specialist, who provided a vocational evaluation. Rogers had referred Bartunek to Karen Brown for an evaluation of Bartunek's lifting ability and other physical capabilities. Dr. Richard Bergstrom detailed Bartunek's injuries, which are described above.

Bartunek relies upon Nat. Bank of Commerce Trust & Savings Assn. v. Rhodes, 207 Neb. 44, 295 N.W.2d 711 (1980). In that case, we affirmed an award of costs to the plaintiff which included an expert witness fee in the amount of $1,000. The plaintiff requested costs in excess of $83,000. Since Rhodes, we have adhered to the policy that the costs of litigation and expenses incident to litigation may not be recovered unless provided for by a statute or a uniform course of procedure. Kliment, supra; Gottsch Feeding Corp., supra.

In Hefti v. Hefti, 166 Neb. 181, 88 N.W.2d 231 (1958), we stated that expert witness fees could be taxed above the statutory fee where a special contract existed. In Lockwood v. Lockwood, 205 Neb. 818, 821, 290 N.W.2d 636, 639 (1980), we held that "a witness who testifies as an expert on a subject...