Via TPM:
The Minnesota election court has now commanded Norm Coleman to pay Al Franken $94,783.15 in itemized costs from the trial.
The Franken legal team had originally asked for $161,000, but the court rejected some of the claims as either not being sufficiently documented or not justified under the loser-pays provision of the election contest law.
But what about the "sore-loser pays double" provision? or is that something I just dreamed about? or the "horse dentures pays quadruple" provision? surely I can't have just imagined that?
Norm was told previously he had to pay, but had been pretending he would win his appeal:
Given this expedited process, it is most efficient for this Court to refrain from considering and deciding Contestee's request for taxation of costs and disbursements until Contestants' expedited appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court is resolved. If Contestants prevail on appeal, then Contestee's request for taxation of costs and disbursements will become moot. If, on the other hand, Contestee prevails on appeal, this Court can promptly issue an Order on Contestee's request.
Does this latest development mean Normie has lost his appeal? Curious people want to know.