Elliott v. Collins
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Nez Perces County. As the witnesses were material and necessary, and tbe trial set and commenced, and no dispute of these facts, the court erred in refusing to allow their fees. (Griffith v. Montandon, 4 Idaho, 75, 35 Pac. 704.) The claim that is resisted here is for witness fees for witnesses that never were sworn.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Nez Perces County. As the witnesses were material and necessary, and tbe trial set and commenced, and no dispute of these facts, the court erred in refusing to allow their fees. (Griffith v. Montandon, 4 Idaho, 75, 35 Pac. 704.) The claim that is resisted here is for witness fees for witnesses that never were sworn. And their attendance and presence was not material or necessary, and their fees were not necessary costs or disbursements to defendant, the case going off on a motion by defendant that could have been presented on April 10th, or any time between April…
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, C. J.
(After Stating the Facts.) — -The question for decision is, Did the court err in entering judgment of' dismissal ? The respondent contends that in the first action the plaintiff elected to sue in assumpsit, and that he could not dismiss that action, and thereafter sue in tort. The trial court sustained this contention, and dismissed the suit. The first, suit was dismissed by the court without prejudice to another action on the motion of plaintiff. In that action the defendant had not answered. That being so, the plaintiff had a right to dismiss his suit at the time he did, under the…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Boise Development Co. v. Boise CityIdaho Supreme Court · 1917
- Whitley v. Spokane & Inland Railway Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1913
- Radioear Corporation v. CrouseIdaho Supreme Court · 1976
- International Nickel Company v. Ford Motor CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1958
- Keesee v. FetzekIdaho Court of Appeals · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.