Holmes v. St. John
New York Supreme Court
—The action in this case was for an assault and battery, and was commenced after the act entitled, “ an act to simplify and abridge the practice, pleadings and proceedings of the courts of this state,” passed April 12,1848, took effect, and before the amendment of that act on the 11th of April, 1849. Two of the defendants appeared and answered, and the cause was tried, at the present circuit, when the plaintiff recovered a verdict of six cents damages.
Read the full summary
—The action in this case was for an assault and battery, and was commenced after the act entitled, “ an act to simplify and abridge the practice, pleadings and proceedings of the courts of this state,” passed April 12,1848, took effect, and before the amendment of that act on the 11th of April, 1849. Two of the defendants appeared and answered, and the cause was tried, at the present circuit, when the plaintiff recovered a verdict of six cents damages. The plaintiff claims that he is entitled to judgment upon his verdict, together with the full costs of the court. The defendant insists that…
1Opinion of the Court
Welles, Justice.
The 4th subdivision of § 304 of the amended code limits the plaintiff’s recovery of costs to the amount of - his damages. But it is insisted that, as the action was commenced previous to the passage of the amendment, and under the original act, which allowed full costs in such cases, the plaintiff’s right to costs must be governed by the law as it existed at the time the action was commenced. The code, as amended, is the only law in existence under which the plaintiff can ask for costs at all. Costs were not given at common law in any case, and the subject was always regulated…
2Cited by1 opinion
- In re the Estate of CunninghamNew York Surrogate's Court · 1914