Legal Opinion

Field v. Hudson

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided March 11, 1915No. 1651Published

On motion to retax costs. No briefs fled.

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OP THE COURT.

MECIIEM, District Judge.

— By our decision of May 4, 1914 (140 Pac. 1118), the judgment of the-lower court was reversed, and without further order the costs were taxed as of course in favor of the appellant. Appellee now moves to retax the same, on the ground' that he, as well as the appellant, prevailed within the meaning of section 3148, C. L. 1897, which provides:

“For all civil actions and proceedings of any kind, the party prevailing shall recover his costs against the other party except in those eases in which a different provision is made by law.”

That this section…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. King v. TaborNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Field v. HudsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1914

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API