Appellants complain of two evidentiary rulings of the district court. It is plain that neither ruling presents an abuse of the district court’s discretion, and in any event it is likewise plain that even if there were error, neither ruling was prejudicial. With respect to appellants’ complaints as to the district court’s taxation of costs of the expert fees for witness Needham and expert Bailes & Co., appellees for whom these costs were taxed voluntarily remitted them by March 30, 2004, filing in the district court; with respect to the $120 videotaping charge, appellees in their brief have agreed to remit that item of costs. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED except that the award of costs is MODIFIED in accordance with the said March 30, 2004 remittitur filed by the Smith County defendants in the district court, and with the further modification that the $120 charge for deposition videotaping is eliminated.

Costs under Fed. R.App. P. 39 are taxed against appellants.