Salisbury's v. Heirs of Philips
New York Supreme Court
JUDGMENT had been given \against the plaintiff, on de- “ murrer to his declaration ; (see 10 Johns. Rep. 57.) and question now submitted to the court was, whether he was liable ___, _ for, COSÍS. •
1Per curiam
This case cannot be distinguished from that of the Administrators of Kellogg v. Wilcox, (2 Johns. Rep. 377.) where it is expressly decided, that if judgment on demurrer be given against executors or administrators, plaintiffs, they must pay costs. The correctness of this decision is now called in question; but a little examination will show, that it is well founded. It necessarily arises out of the construction to be given to the 12th section of our act,relative to costs; (1 N. R. L. 346.) the terms of ivhich are as broad as language can make it. It contains nothing that could give colour to…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Ackley v. . ParmenterNew York Court of Appeals · 1885