Burkle v. . Luce
New York Court of Appeals
Double costs. The defendant in error was sued in the Supreme Court for an act done by him as a public officer. The judgment in that Court was in his favor, and was affirmed by this Court in January last. The usual entry of the judgment was made' by the Clerk, giving only single costs, and without any request for that purpose the Clerk also made out a remittitur and sent it by mail to.the. Attorney for the defendant in error.
Read the full summary
Double costs. The defendant in error was sued in the Supreme Court for an act done by him as a public officer. The judgment in that Court was in his favor, and was affirmed by this Court in January last. The usual entry of the judgment was made' by the Clerk, giving only single costs, and without any request for that purpose the Clerk also made out a remittitur and sent it by mail to.the. Attorney for the defendant in error. The Attorney seeing that only single costs were allowed, did not file the remittitur in the Supreme Court, hut kept it in his own hands, and now moved this Court that the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court
held, that the statue gives double costs to public officers on writ of error as well as in the Court of original jurisdiction. Also, that the Court did not lose jurisdiction until the remittitur should be filed in the Court below; and as that had not been done in this case, that the motion might be granted, on condition that the Attorney return the remittitur to the Clerk of this Court to be cancelled.
Rule accordingly.
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lovett v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1892
- Wood v. Board of Commissioners of Excise of the Town of RandolphNew York Supreme Court · 1894
- Shaver v. EldredNew York Supreme Court · 1895