Legal Opinion

Brown v. Cohan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 27, 1938PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The plaintiffs appeal from orders denying retaxation of separate bills of costs in each of six actions brought against the same defendant and arising out of the same set of facts. The actions were not consolidated but were tried together as provided by section 96-a of the Civil Practice Act. Defendant was entitled to tax costs in each action as the jury had returned verdicts of no cause of action. Plaintiffs could have avoided this liability by becoming coplaintiffs in one action. However, that procedure would have required them to forego the right to separate bills of costs in each action…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. M. Salimoff & Co. v. Standard Oil Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
  2. Hoffman v. GrobsmithNew York Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Parker v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Clark v. MacDonaldNew York Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Hoffman v. GrobsmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Canners Exchange Subscribers at Warners Inter-Insurance Bureau v. North American Canning Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
  2. Blaise v. BovinCity of New York Municipal Court · 1939
  3. In re the Accounting of Franklin National BankNew York Surrogate's Court · 1958
  4. Canners Exchange Subscribers at Warners Inter-Insurance Bureau v. North American Canning Co. (Two Cases). Warner Reciprocal Insurers v. North American Canning CoCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
  5. Parkman, Inc. v. HuffcutAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API