The Parties were unable to agree on Costs following Trial. Thomas J. referred to Rule 10.33 which identifies a range of considerations that are relevant when considering the applicable Costs. The Plaintiffs initially named several other Defendants, however, the Claims against all but two of the Defendants were removed from the Action prior to Trial. The Plaintiffs then Discontinued the Action against one of the two remaining Defendants with consent. Following Trial, the remaining Defendant argued that he should not be responsible for those costs flowing from Questioning the other Defendants, court reporter fees related to the other Defendants, Costs to review the other Defendants’ documents and the disbursements related to service on the other Defendants.

Thomas J. determined that the Plaintiff acted reasonably and was justified in including the other Defendants in the Action. As such, the costs associated with Questioning the other Defendants were reasonable and necessary under the circumstances. Thomas J. did reduce the Cost associated with reviewing the other Defendants’ documents as the evidence was that the remaining Defendant did not produce much documentation.