Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, LTD
Issues
Whether a party can be awarded court costs for costs incurred in translating written documents.
After falling through a deck on property owned by Respondent Kan Pacific Saipan, LTD, Petitioner Kouichi Taniguchi filed suit against the company for negligence. The district court granted summary judgment in Kan Pacific’s favor, and also awarded the company costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920(6); the award included costs incurred in translating various documents from Japanese to English. The Ninth Circuit upheld the lower court’s decision, holding that the phrase “compensation of interpreters” in § 1920(6) applies to written translations, in addition to verbal interpretations. Taniguchi now appeals, arguing that the statute’s plain meaning, structure, and legislative history indicate that the term “interpreters” should be limited to oral translators of spoken language. The Supreme Court will decide whether litigants can recover for non-verbal translation costs; this decision has the potential to increase recoverable court costs, and to deter meritorious litigation.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Section 1920 of 28 U.S.C. sets out the categories of costs that may be awarded to the prevailing party in a federal lawsuit. One of the listed categories is “compensation of interpreters.” § 1920(6).
The question presented is whether costs incurred in translating written documents are “compensation of interpreters” for purposes of section 1920(6).
Petitioner Kouichi Taniguchi, a professional baseball player in Japan, dropped through a wooden deck during a tour of property belonging to Respondent Kan Pacific Saipan, LTD. See Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, LTD, 633 F.3d 1218, 1219 (9th Cir.
Edited by
Additional Resources
Legal Language Services, Supreme Court to Decide if Translation Costs Can Be Recouped (Jan. 12, 2012).
Morningside Translations, Legal Translation: Who Should Pay? (Nov. 4, 2011).