Folkman v. Myers
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised hy Vice-Chancellor Learning, who filed the following opinion: “I am convinced that in the circumstances here present it would not he in harmony with the recognized rules to allow costs to be taxed by either party against the other.
Read the full summary
On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised hy Vice-Chancellor Learning, who filed the following opinion: “I am convinced that in the circumstances here present it would not he in harmony with the recognized rules to allow costs to be taxed by either party against the other. While tire statute makes costs in the circumstances here existing discretionary, that discretion appears to be almost, if not quite, uni formally exercised by a denial of costs when each party has succeeded in part in substantial issues. And tire denial of taxed costs necessarily includes the denial of any…
1Per curiam
'The decree appealed from will he affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by ’Vice-Chancellor Learning.
For affirmance — Ti-ie Ci-iiee-Justioe, Swayze, Trenciiakd, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kaliscii, Black, Katzenbaci-i, Hgppeni-ieimer, Williams, Gardner, Van Buskirk — 13. For reversal — None.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hinners v. BirkevaagNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
- Mooney v. PetnickNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1929