Legal Opinion

Booshee v. . Surles

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 5, 1881PublishedCited by 2 opinions

MotioN to retax costs heard at Spring Term, 1880, of Harnett Superior Court, before Eure, J.

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, C. J.

The plaintiff suing in forma pauperis under the statute, recovered judgment against the defendant L. M. Surles for a certain sum, and against his associate defendant J. C. Surles for the one-eleventh part thereof, to be when paid a reduction pro tanto of the debt. The fees of the plaintiff’s witnesses were omitted in the bill of costs, and after notice the present motion is made in their behalf to tax those fees against both defendants. Upon the hearing the court allowed a reformation of the judgment, so as to charge L. M. Surles with ten-elevenths, and J. C. Surles with the remaining…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Holloman v. Holloman.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  2. Draper v. J. A. Buxton & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1884

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

Powered by the Exa API