Peerless Light Co. v. Leviton
District Court, S.D. New York
In Equity. Suit by the Peerless Eight Company against Evser Levitón and Isidor Levitón, copartners trading as the Levitón Gaslight Company. There was a decree for complainant pro confesso, and it moves for a docket fee.
1Opinion of the Court
AUGUSTUS N. HAND, District Judge.
The question arises whether the complainant is entitled to a docket fee upon a decree taken pro confesso. Section 824 of the Revised Statutes (Comp. St. 1916, § 1378) allows, “on a final hearing in equity and admiralty, a docket fee of twenty ($20) dollars. * * *” In The Dwinsk (D. C.) 227 Fed. 958, I held that a docket fee could not be allowed in admiralty on the granting of a decree by consent of the parties.
That a docket fee is taxable where a decree is granted pro confesso is laid down in several cases, so that it can, I think, be regarded as the rule in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wooster v. HandyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1885
- Andrews v. ColeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1884
- Ryan v. GouldU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1887
- The DwinskDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1915
- Wigton v. BrainerdUnited States Circuit Court · 1886
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. HerlongDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1949
- The CarniaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1932