3 U.S. 306 - Arcambel v. Wiseman — 3 U.S. 306

How this case has been cited

Cited by 93 later decisions (14 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2025 · most notably Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper (1980), Hutto v. Finney (1979)

32 federal appellate · 2 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 10 states

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1THE decree of the Circuit Court, for the Diftritft of Rhode Ifland, was affirmed-in this caufe, without argument, the principal queftion, which it involved, having been juft decided upon the difcuffion of another writ of error. • It appeared, however, by an eftimate of the damages on which the decree was founded, and which was annexed to the record, that a charge of 1600 dollars for counfel’s fees in the courts below, had beeen' allowed ; to which Caxe objeiSed ; and In-gerfoll contended that it might fairly be'included, under the idea of damages. But

¶2By the Court

¶3:—We do not think that this charge ought to be allowed. The general pra£lice of the United States is in opofttion to it; and even if that pratftice. were not ftridtly correct in principle, it is entitled to the refpeét of the court, till it is changed, or modified, by ftatute. ; ■

¶4There are feveral ways in which the- charge may be expunged: l?ut we recommend, as, perhaps, the eafieft way; that the counfel for the Defendant in error, ihould enter a remitti . tur for the amount. .

¶5A remittitur was accordingly entered.