Sipperly v. Warner
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from taxation of costs. The action being at issue was noticed for trial at the circuit held in Albany, in June, 1853. After the commencement of the circuit and before the cause was reached upon the calendar it was referred by consent of the attorneys for the parties. The plaintiff having obtained a report in his favor, claimed, upon the taxation of his costs, to be allowed a fee of $10 for the June circuit. This item was objected to, and disallowed by the clerk.
Read the full summary
Appeal from taxation of costs. The action being at issue was noticed for trial at the circuit held in Albany, in June, 1853. After the commencement of the circuit and before the cause was reached upon the calendar it was referred by consent of the attorneys for the parties. The plaintiff having obtained a report in his favor, claimed, upon the taxation of his costs, to be allowed a fee of $10 for the June circuit. This item was objected to, and disallowed by the clerk. The plaintiff moved for a retaxation.
1Opinion of the Court
Harris, Justice.
I think the fee in question should have been allowed to the plaintiff. The cause was “ necessarily ” on •the calendar, for by the term “ necessarily,” I suppose nothing more is intended than that the cause should be regularly or properly upon the calendar. In other words, the cause is necessarily on the calendar, when, being at issue and in readiness for trial, the party who has noticed it for trial has put it on the calendar for the purpose of trying it, if he has an opportunity.
The cause was also postponed. It is true that the order which had the effect to postpone the trial…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- New Jersey Steam Navigation Company v. MERCHANTS'BANK.Supreme Court of the United States · 1848
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kahn v. CoenNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894