3 Wend. 326
Decided October 15, 1829
New York Supreme Court · decided 1829-10-15
The defendant after issue joi»< ed paid a certain sum into court in satisfaction of the plain- ^ ^ tiff’s demand and of the costs then accrued. The plaintiff' took the money, and proceeded in his suit. On the trial of . ^ a the cause, after the evidence was closed on both sides, the pl^tiff submitted to a nonsuit. The defendant consequently became entitled to costs.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently August 1843
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1829-10-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1By the Court,
¶2The taxing officer properly rejected those charges. The payment of the money into court was an admission of the plaintiff’s demand to that amount. The plaintiff, therefore, had a good cause of action until the payment of the money, and until then the defendant had no defence. The defendant is entitled only to the costs incurred in the defence subsequent to the payment of the money into court. (2 Barnes, 230. 1 T. R. 629. id 710. 8 T. R. 408.) The motion, therefore, is denied.