Clifton v. . Wynne
Supreme Court of North Carolina
MotioN by defendant to Retax Costs, beard at June Term, 1879, of The Supbeiib Coubt. The question presented is whether the act of 1879, ch. 41, abolishing the tax fee of attorneys in civil suits, prevents the clerks from taxing such fees in cases heard at January term, 1879, of this court after the date of the ratification of said act.
Read the full summary
MotioN by defendant to Retax Costs, beard at June Term, 1879, of The Supbeiib Coubt. The question presented is whether the act of 1879, ch. 41, abolishing the tax fee of attorneys in civil suits, prevents the clerks from taxing such fees in cases heard at January term, 1879, of this court after the date of the ratification of said act. See same case, 80 N. C., 145. In opposition to the motion cited Farley v. Lea, 4 Dev. and Bat., 169 ; Finly v. Smith, 2 Ire., 225; Norwood v. Thorp, 64 N. C., 682; Johnson v. Sedberry, 65 N. C., 1; Bates v. Bank, Ibid., 81; Foust v. Trice, 8 Jones, 490. The apt…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, C. J.
The general assembly at its late session, passed an act “to abolish the tax fees of attorneys charged, in bills of cost in civil suits,” which was ratified and took effect on the 14th day of February, 1879. Acts of 1879,. ch. 41.
The first section enacts “ that clerks of the supreme and superior courts shall not include or charge in any bill of' costs any attorney’s fee in any civil suit hereafter determined in any court of the state, and that all laws or parts of laws coming in conflict and within the meaning and purview of this act, be and they are hereby repealed.”
The defendant’s counsel…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Worthy v. . BradySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
- Churchill v. . TurnageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- In Re Will of HowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Turrentine v. . Richmond Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Webber v. . WebberSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.