Tae Troy City Bank v. Grant
New York Supreme Court
Motion by defendants for retaxation of costs.—This was an action of assumpsit. The cause was tried in November, 1843, and a verdict rendered for plaintiff for $233'60. The defendants stayed plaintiffs’ proceedings and made a bill of exceptions, which was argued at the last October term, and at the last January term was decided against the defendants. The plaintiffs then made out their costs and procured the same to be taxed.
Read the full summary
Motion by defendants for retaxation of costs.—This was an action of assumpsit. The cause was tried in November, 1843, and a verdict rendered for plaintiff for $233'60. The defendants stayed plaintiffs’ proceedings and made a bill of exceptions, which was argued at the last October term, and at the last January term was decided against the defendants. The plaintiffs then made out their costs and procured the same to be taxed. At the time of the taxation, the plaintiffs demand for which the verdict was rendered with interest exceeded two hundred and fifty dollars; and the taxing officer allowed…
1Opinion of the Court
Bronson, Chief Justice.
One third the amount of attorney and coun*136sel fees as taxed must be deducted. We have always held that the “ recovery” within the meaning of the act regulating costs, is the recovery for damages. If the plaintiff gets interest on his verdict, it is by taxation as costs. The verdict must govern, nnd the circumstance that proceedings have been stayed by case or bill of exceptions makes no difference.
Rule, deducting one-third attorney and counsel fee.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Warner Weather-Master of Westchester, Inc. v. Strom, New York County Courts1964
- Scoville v. KentNew York Supreme Court · 1868