Maggio v. Lee
Indiana Court of Appeals
1ConcurrenceSullivan, Judge
I do not believe that “costs” as reimbursement for expenses incurred are the “costs” contemplated in State v. Holder (1973) 260 Ind. 336, 295 N.E.2d 799. The Holder case dealt with a specific statute, the Eminent Domain Act. Furthermore, as noted by Justice DeBruler in the majority opinion, the word “costs" as there considered included only those expenses of trial “which are prescribed by statute to be paid to the court.” Id. at 339, 295 N.E.2d at 801. The opinion observed that the legislature did not apparently intend to include in the statute, such “costs” as are contemplated by Indiana…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Briggs v. Clinton County Bank & Trust Co. of FrankfortIndiana Court of Appeals · 1983
- State v. Everett HolderIndiana Supreme Court · 1973
- State v. HicksIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
- Hamilton v. HamiltonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1986