Prescott v. Bartlett
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
In this case the defendants claim several costs under the following circumstances: The suit iá trespass to the person of the plaintiff and the defendants plead severally the general issue with brief statements ; that of David Bartlett alleges that what he did was in the necessary defense of his close and of his person; the other two defendants justify as servants and sons of David Bartlett, and in addition David F. Bartlett sets forth an assault upon himself.
Read the full summary
In this case the defendants claim several costs under the following circumstances: The suit iá trespass to the person of the plaintiff and the defendants plead severally the general issue with brief statements ; that of David Bartlett alleges that what he did was in the necessary defense of his close and of his person; the other two defendants justify as servants and sons of David Bartlett, and in addition David F. Bartlett sets forth an assault upon himself. At the April term of the court of common pleas, 1859, a general verdict was entered for each of said defendants, and separate costs…
1Opinion of the CourtBartlett, J.
“ Several pleading does not conclusively entitle the parties to several costs.” Ticknor v. Harris, 15 N. H. 108. In Crosby v. Lovejoy, 6 N. H. 458, it did not appear that the defenses depended upon the same question of fact; and so in Currier v. Enfield, 28 N. H. 74, where separate bills of costs were allowed, the court remarking that upon petitions for highways the interests and defenses of the several towns were ordinarily dissimilar. The latter case is not necessarily inconsistent with Hanson v. Ossipee, 20 N. H. 524, which states, as the general rule, that but one bill of costs is allowed…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Meagher v. BachelderMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- North Bank v. WoodSupreme Court of Vermont · 1839