Richardson v. Cassilly
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the common pleas of Jllleghany county. In a suit pending between Patrick Cassilly and William Richardson, the parties, by parol, agreed to refer it; the referees made a report for the plaintiff for 25 dollars and costs of the suit. This award the plaintiff entered and issued an execution upon it. Upon a writ of error by the defendant,* the judgment was reversed.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the common pleas of Jllleghany county. In a suit pending between Patrick Cassilly and William Richardson, the parties, by parol, agreed to refer it; the referees made a report for the plaintiff for 25 dollars and costs of the suit. This award the plaintiff entered and issued an execution upon it. Upon a writ of error by the defendant,* the judgment was reversed. The defendant in error, Cassilly, paid the costs in the supreme court, and brought the record down in order-to get his award, to enforce it; and he brought this action of assumpsit, to recover the costs which had accrued in…
1Per curiam
A bill of costs is evidence to charge a party with a debt, only because the act of taxation is in the nature of an adjudication. Though it be the immediate act of the officer, it is in contemplation of law, the act of the court; and it is even its immediate act, when an appeal has been taken. What, then, is legitimate evidence of taxation? Not an endorsement to denote that the paper was filed — for that is a matter of course in all cases — nor yet testimony by one in the service of the prothonotary, that it is the practice of the office not to issue execution for costs without previous…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hamilton v. AslinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kottcamp v. York CountySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Dodd v. LewisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Reigel's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1881
- Reigel's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1881
- Reigel's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1881