Warner v. Liquid Carbonic Co.
District Court, N.D. Georgia
At I,aw. Action by M. R. Warner, by next friend, against the Liquid Carbonic Company. Judgment for plaintiff on a consent verdict, and defendant moves to retax the costs.
1Opinion of the Court
SIBLEY, District Judge.
Before this case at law was ready for trial the parties agreed that a verdict in plaintiff’s favor for .$25 should be taken. This was stated in open court; a jury was irnpan-neled and directed to sign a verdict, no witnesses being called or sworn. The clerk entered in his journal, “Consent verdict.” Judgment was thereupon signed for the amount of the verdict and costs. In taxing the costs, the clerk included $20 as a docket fee for the plaintiff’s attorney. On a motion to retax, this item of costs is objected to.
[1,2] Costs as such were not allowed at common law. They…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- International Agr. Corp. v. CaryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1917
- Scatcherd v. LoveCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1908
- Michigan Aluminum Foundry Co. v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1911
- Merritt & Chapman Derrick & Wrecking Co. v. Catskill & N. Y. Steamboat Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1901
- The DwinskDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Merritt v. MerrittDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1927