Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

85 N.Y. 241

Burdett v. . Lowe

New York Court of Appeals

Decided April 26, 1881

New York Court of Appeals · decided 1881-04-26

(Reported below, 22 Hun, 588.) This action was brought upon an undertaking given on appeal from an order of General Term reversing a judgment and granting a new trial. The undertaking was as required and in the form prescribed by the Code of Procedure then, in force (§ 334), to perfect an appeal; i. Upon the trial, defendants claimed that the recovery should be limited to the costs of appeal to this court and moved the court to direct a verdict for no greater sum.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1916

2 state decisions

Relies on Post v. . Doremus

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1881-04-26

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Danforth, J.

¶1 There was an excess of words in the undertaking construed in Post v. Doremus (60 N. Y. 371); but eliminating those, the obligation was precisely like that on which this action was brought. The circumstances of the two cases, and the stage of the action at which the prevailing party became entitled to costs, are also the same, and the decision then made must control here. The plaintiffs, therefore, were entitled to recover only such costs as could be taxed against Harris and Jones (the unsuccessful appellants) as costs of appeal to this court. The defendants’ counsel also claims that an offer of judgment was made and that costs of this action should be adjusted accordingly. But that fact does not appear upon the record and cannot be considered.

¶2 The judgment of the General and Special Terms should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

¶3 All .concur.

¶4 Judgment reversed.

/85/ny/241 · .json · Public domain