Solomon v. McLennan
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Cass District Court. — ITon. N. W. Macy, J udge. This was an action in attachment to recover damages alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of the defendant in permitting a stallion to escape and run at large. The defendant filed a cross-petition, claiming damages upon the attachment bond. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment ■for the defendant for five dollars.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cass District Court. — ITon. N. W. Macy, J udge. This was an action in attachment to recover damages alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of the defendant in permitting a stallion to escape and run at large. The defendant filed a cross-petition, claiming damages upon the attachment bond. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment ■for the defendant for five dollars. The ordinary costs for witness fees, court costs, and the like, were taxed to the plaintiff, and the judgment and costs were paid. Afterwards the defendant filed a motion for an allowance of…
1Opinion of the Court
Eotiieook, O. J.
The trial was had, and judgment entered, at the February term, 1888, of the district-court. Afterwards the judgment and costs were paid. On the fifteenth day of February, 1889,. the defendant made his application to have an attorney’s fee taxed. The excuse, for not making the application when the judgment was entered was that by ‘"some oversight there was no fee taxed for the defendant’s attorney.” We must presume that this oversight was not that of the court or the clerk. Of course the court would not, of its own motion, tax the fee, and the clerk could not tax it because he…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Fisher v. Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- Peters v. Snavely-AshtonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909