Meagher v. Van Zandt
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, Nye County. The opinion in this case does, not require a statement of the facts. I. The court erred in not accepting, as evidence, the subpeena iu Harvey v. Van Zandt.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, Nye County. The opinion in this case does, not require a statement of the facts. I. The court erred in not accepting, as evidence, the subpeena iu Harvey v. Van Zandt. It would have conclusively proved that the mileage fees paid was a necessazy disbursement in the Harvey case ; that the same had been paid in that action, and unless required to attend in this case by the process of the court issued in this action and duly served ozi the witnesses, the charge of such mileage fees was not a proper charge to make in this action. (2…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Leonard, J.:
As we construe the statute governing .the allowance of witness fees in civil actions, it is only necessary, upon the facts presented, to decide whether or not such fees, for mileage or attendance, of the opposite party’s witnesses, can be taxed, and judgment therefor entered against the losing party, when such witnesses have not' been subpoenaed in the case according to law, or sworn or examined, although present in court at the request of the successful party. The question whether such witnesses could compel the party requesting their attendance to pay them…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Hiestand v. RistauNebraska Supreme Court · 1939
- Agricultural Insurance Co. of Watertown v. BiltzNevada Supreme Court · 1937
- Alexander v. HarrisonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1891
- Hanchett v. HumphreyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1899
- Zelavin v. Tonopah Belmont Development Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1915
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.