The William Cox

United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York

Decided September 12, 1881.

United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York · decided 1881-09-12

<p>1. Appeal — Costs.</p> <p>Where both parties appeal, and the decree of the ¿ower court is affirmed, neither party recovers costs of the appellate court. ’</p>

Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1890

1 federal appellate · 9 district ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Jackson v. Ashton · Lucius Stockton and Daniel Moore v. Harriet Bishop · Mason v. The Steam-Tug William Murtaugh

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1881-09-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶11. Appeal — Costs.

¶2Where both parties appeal, and the decree of the ¿ower court is affirmed, neither party recovers costs of the appellate court. ’

¶3Beebe, Wilcox & Hobbs, for libellant.

¶4E. D. McCarthy, for claimants.

¶6Blatchford, C. J.

¶7In this; case I entirely concur in the views of the district judge, and his conclusion, in his decision in the court below, based upon the rule laid down by that court in the case of The William Murtaugh, 3 Fed. Rep. 404, which rule is a proper one for the protection of property and life. There must be a decree for the libellant for $733.05, with interest from January 28, 1881, and for his costs in the district court, taxed at $265.85. As both parties appealed to this court, and the decree below is not disturbed, neither party is to recover costs of this court.