Bartunek v. Gentrup, S-92-875

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

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

Page 254

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.

246 Neb. 19

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:[246 Neb. 20]

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

...