Rosenberger v. Harper
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Pike Circuit Court — Hon. Reuben F. Roy, Judge. (1) This was a proceeding by attachment; had the court the right to tax all costs against the plaintiff accrued after the date the tender was made ? (2) In no event is the plaintiff liable for any costs except the defendant’s accrued after the tender was made, namely the costs of his subpoenas and the service of the same together with the defendant’s witnesses fees and no other.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Pike Circuit Court — Hon. Reuben F. Roy, Judge. (1) This was a proceeding by attachment; had the court the right to tax all costs against the plaintiff accrued after the date the tender was made ? (2) In no event is the plaintiff liable for any costs except the defendant’s accrued after the tender was made, namely the costs of his subpoenas and the service of the same together with the defendant’s witnesses fees and no other. (3) But should any of the costs have been taxed against the plaintiff unless the offer was accompanied with the proviso that the attachment should be…
1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.
This is an action for damages with an attachment in aid. There was a plea in abatement, and while it was pending, to wit, on the twenty-fourth day of April, 1897, tlie defendant made a written offer under section 2191 of the Revised Statutes of 1889, to allow a judgment to go against him for twenty-five dollars. The plaintiff declined the offer. Subsequently the attachment was sustained, and upon a trial on the merits the plaintiff recovered a verdict for five dollars. The judgment entry recites the offer of defendant, and the *172court adjudged that the plaintiff pay all costs in the case…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Parr v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1916
- Patrick v. Ilwaco Oyster Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1937
- Brown v. ColeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910