Candler v. Washoe Lake Reservoir & Galena Creek Ditch Co.
Nevada Supreme Court
On motion to strike out cost bill. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. I. The cost bill in this action was not filed within the time prescribed by the laws of the State of Nevada. II. Said cost bill was not filed within the time prescribed by subdivision 2 of rule VI of this court. I. There is no provision of the statute requiring cost bills to be filed in the supreme court within two days. II.
Read the full summary
On motion to strike out cost bill. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. I. The cost bill in this action was not filed within the time prescribed by the laws of the State of Nevada. II. Said cost bill was not filed within the time prescribed by subdivision 2 of rule VI of this court. I. There is no provision of the statute requiring cost bills to be filed in the supreme court within two days. II. Section 3581 of the Compiled Laws of Nevada does not apply to the practice in the supreme court. (Gray v. Palmer, 11 Cal. 341.) III. When the legislature adopts the laws of another state, it…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Norcross, J.:
The appellant in this ease was awarded its costs upon appeal. (See page 151 of this volume.) Subsequent to the filing of the opinion and decision in the case, but before the time had elapsed for issuance of remittitur, counsel for appellant filed with the clerk of this court a cost bill, covering the fees and charges of the clerk of this court, the cost of typewriting the transcript on appeal, and what doubtless is the costs of the clerk of the lower court in perfecting the appeal. Counsel for respondent have moved to strike this cost bill from the files, upon the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ex parte BurrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Gray v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- McKenzie v. CoslettNevada Supreme Court · 1905
3Cited by2 opinions
- Brandon v. WestNevada Supreme Court · 1905
- Hirsh v. Ogden Furniture & Carpet Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1918