Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

17 Abb. Pr. 18

Shaw v. Dwight

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1863

New York Supreme Court · decided 1863-12-15

This action was hy Daniel J. Shaw against Henry Dwight, Jr., and Ancel St. John. The plaintiff had jndgment which had been affirmed with costs by the Cotirt of Appeals. The cause was on the calendar of the Court of Appeals twelve terms, not reached or necessarily postponed. On appeal from the clerk’s adjustment of costs, the plaintiff was allowed to tax only five term-fees: he appealed.

Decided 1863-12-15

Sutherland, P. J.

¶1The question of costs presented by the appeal was recently carefully examined by Judge Bosworth, of the Superior Court, in G-lentworth a. Mount, and he came to the conclusion, that since the amendment, in 1858, of section 307 of the Code, there has been and is no limitation to the number of term-fees in the Court of Appeals, taxable under subdivision 7 of that section. A copy of his opinion* having been handed to the court, I have examined it with care, and entirely agree with him. Judge Parker arrived at the same conclusion, in Adams a. Perkins (25 How. Pr., 368). The order appealed from should be .reversed, with $10 costs, and the clerk should be directed to readjust the costs, and allow the $120 for the twelve term-fees.

¶2Barnard, J., concurred.

Leonard, J.

¶3The opinion of the presiding judge is correct, I think, according to the legal construction of statutes; though the costs for term-fees in the Court of Appeals seem to have been lost sight of by the framers of the amendment.

¶4Reported, Ante, 15.

/17/abbpr/18 · .json · Public domain