492.590. Costs and expenses of taking depositions, how awarded and collected — limitations. — 1. The costs and expenses of depositions, whether originals or copies, or related court reporter, notarial, or other fees of recording the same, shall be awarded as a judgment in favor of the party or parties requesting the same, and collected in the manner provided by section 514.460*. Any party incurring any such costs or expenses may request the taxing of such costs or expenses actually incurred by that party whether or not such depositions were taken at the instance of that party or some other party to the suit or suits, provided, however, that any judgment awarded for copies of depositions shall be limited to the cost of one copy per party, except upon leave of court.
2. The costs and expenses so incurred shall be certified by the reporter taking the same and shall be further limited by the court in which the action is pending at the request of either party with said limitation based on:
(1) The relevancy and probative value of the testimony offered by deponent;
(2) The time required in the taking of the deposition;
(3) The reasonableness of the charge made by the reporter;
(4) The availability of stenographers or shorthand reporters in the area where the deposition is taken;
(5) Charges made by other stenographers or shorthand reporters in the community.
Notes of Decisions
Williams v. Trans States Airlines, Inc., 281 S.W.3d 854 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 4× “First, Section 492.590 provides for the taxing of deposition costs and expenses with limitations based on: (1) The relevancy and probative value of the testimony offered by deponent; (2) The time required in the taking of the deposition; (3) The reasonableness of the charge made…”
Litton v. Kornbrust, 85 S.W.3d 110 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 5× “In his second point, Appellant claims the trial court erred in assessing deposition expenses as taxable costs against Appellant under § 492.590. In its judgment, the trial court ordered Appellant to pay the costs of the proceedings.”
Calzaretta v. Willard, 391 S.W.3d 488 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 4× “Scla-roff s testimony did not have “relevant value”; and that certain of the costs did not comport with section 492.590. 1 Calzaretta also countered with a motion for sanctions relating to the deposition costs of Dr.”
Multidata Sys. Int'l Corp. v. Zhu, 107 S.W.3d 334 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 5× “The statute also provides that the reporter taking the deposition shall certify the costs, and that the costs may be limited based upon the relevancy and probative value of the testimony of the deponent.”
Blechle v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 28 S.W.3d 484 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 4× “91 1 in deposition expenses “be taxed as costs against plaintiffs and in favor of Goodyear, pursuant to § 492.590 RSMo (1997).” Nearly six months later, on October 19, 1998, the Circuit Court Clerk taxed costs against plaintiffs in the amount of $121.”
Wulfing v. Kansas City S. Indus., Inc., 842 S.W.2d 133 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “KCSI argues that Wulfing did not show the relevancy of the Barnard deposition to this litigation and so the deposition costs were not proven under § 492.590, RSMo (Supp.1990) It is enough to say that Wulfing no longer has a judgment for damages, and so may not recover his costs.”
Burwick v. Wood, 959 S.W.2d 951 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 12× “Appellants’ first point deals -with Section 492.590, RSMo Supp.1994 (since amended, effective July 1, 1997, see § 492.”
Stogsdill v. Gen. Am. Life Ins. Co., 541 S.W.2d 696 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 2× “The relevant statute regarding the taxation as costs expenses of depositions is § 492.590 RSMo 1969. This statute limits *702 costs and expenses of taking depositions to those enumerated — none of which could be construed as encompassing attorney’s fees.”
Keogh v. Fleming Mfg. Co. (In re Keogh), 509 B.R. 915 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 2014).
· cites it 2× “20 be taxed as court costs under Missouri Statute Section 492.590 which states: The costs and expenses of depositions, whether originals or copies, or related court reporter, notarial, or other fees of recording the same, shall be awarded as a judgment in favor of the party or…”
Heiden v. Gen. Motors Corp., 567 S.W.2d 401 (Mo. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 4× “The statute in this state which provides for deposition expenses to be allowed as costs is Section 492.590. 2 That section contains a precise formula specifying just how deposition costs are to be computed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.