Skip to content
  • Team
  • Practice Areas
    • Civil Rights
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Alternative Dispute Resolution
    • Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder
  • Resources
    • General Resources
    • Case Developments
    • Seventh Circuit Roundup
    • Prisoners’ Rights Listserv
    • Opioid Use Disorder
  • Careers
  • Team
  • Practice Areas
    • Civil Rights
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Alternative Dispute Resolution
    • Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder
  • Resources
    • General Resources
    • Case Developments
    • Seventh Circuit Roundup
    • Prisoners’ Rights Listserv
    • Opioid Use Disorder
  • Careers
Contact Us
312-852-2184
Call Today
  • Team
  • Practice Areas
    • Civil Rights
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Alternative Dispute Resolution
    • Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder
  • Resources
    • General Resources
    • Case Developments
    • Seventh Circuit Roundup
    • Prisoners’ Rights Listserv
    • Opioid Use Disorder
  • Careers
  • Team
  • Practice Areas
    • Civil Rights
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Alternative Dispute Resolution
    • Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder
  • Resources
    • General Resources
    • Case Developments
    • Seventh Circuit Roundup
    • Prisoners’ Rights Listserv
    • Opioid Use Disorder
  • Careers
Lane v. Person
40 F.4th 813 (7th Cir. 2022)

In Lane v. Person, the court (Brennan/Scudder/Kirsch, per curiam) reduces the judgment of costs against Lane, finding that one of the charges—a $2,750 “witness fee” for the deposition of another doctor who treated the plaintiff—was improper because the U.S. Code sets the amount of costs chargeable to the losing party for a witness fee at $40. The court dismisses the defendant’s argument that the doctor’s witness fee was really an expert fee because (1) no one disclosed the doctor as an expert under Rule 26, and (2) even if he was a witness, he was defendant’s witness (retained by him through the fee), and that fee, like other expert witness charges, is not recoverable.


Lane v. PersonDownload
PrevPrevious
NextNext

More
Summaries

Burns v. Polk

August 19, 2026

Felton v. Johnson

August 19, 2026

Passwater v. Pretorius

August 19, 2026
join our prisoners' rights Listserv
2071 N Southport Ave, Suite 205 Chicago, IL, 60614
  • 1-312-852-2184
  • hello@kaplangrady.com

Terms • Privacy • Accessibility

Terms/Privacy • Accessibility

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome

This website contains attorney advertising

© Kaplan & Grady LLC 2026

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome • This website contains attorney advertising

Please contact us with information about your case

By submitting this form you agree to receive SMS from Kaplan & Grady. Carrier and Data rates may apply. Message frequency may vary. Reply STOP at any time to end messaging or Reply Help for more information.

By submitting this form you agree to receive SMS from Kaplan & Grady. Carrier and Data rates may apply. Message frequency may vary. Reply STOP at any time to end messaging or Reply Help for more information.

Your submission will be reviewed and a notification will be emailed.