Snyder v. Iowa City
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Cedar Circuit Court. DuriNG the February term, 1874, at which this cause was pending, defendant amended the answer and the cause was continued at the costs'of defendant. Plaintiff demanded that, in addition to the ordinary costs of the term, extra compensation be taxed in favor of two persons summoned, as claimed by counsel, as experts.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Cedar Circuit Court. DuriNG the February term, 1874, at which this cause was pending, defendant amended the answer and the cause was continued at the costs'of defendant. Plaintiff demanded that, in addition to the ordinary costs of the term, extra compensation be taxed in favor of two persons summoned, as claimed by counsel, as experts. The plaintiff, in support of his claim, filed an affidavit- setting forth in substance the following facts: That the’cause was specialty set down for hearing on Tuesday, the 24th inst., and for the purpose of proving parts of his cause, plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
-These costs were taxed under the provisions of section 3814 of the Code of 1873, as follows: “Witnesses called to testify only to an opinion founded on special study or experience in any branch of science, or to make scientific or professional examinations and state the result thereof, shall receive additional compensation, to be fixed by the court, with reference to the value of the'time employed and the degree of learning or skill required.”
Whilst the witnesses in question are physicians, and competent to testify to an opinion founded on special study and exjoerience, yet it does not…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Buchman v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
- Meyer v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991
- Joy v. Ingham Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
- Meyer v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991