Wilklow v. Bell
New York Supreme Court
The plaintiff sued John J. Bell as the maker, and Daniel D. Bell and Meeker Gorham as the indorsers of a promissory note, in this action. They all defended, having put in separate answers. The cause was tried at the Ulster circuit. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff against John J. Bell, and against the plaintiff in favor of the defendants Daniel D.' Bell and Meeker Gorham.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff sued John J. Bell as the maker, and Daniel D. Bell and Meeker Gorham as the indorsers of a promissory note, in this action. They all defended, having put in separate answers. The cause was tried at the Ulster circuit. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff against John J. Bell, and against the plaintiff in favor of the defendants Daniel D.' Bell and Meeker Gorham. The latter thereupon entered judgment for their costs, without application to the court, or an award of costs in their favor. The plaintiff objected unsuccessfully to the taxation, and the judgment being…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court—Hogebooh, Justice.
By the terms of section 304 of the Code, costs are allowed, of course, to the plaintiff upon a recovery in the actions therein mentioned—which are the ordinary common.law actions—with certain exceptions not material to be noticed. And as no discrimination is expressly made between cases where the plaintiff recovers against all of the defendants, and where he recovers only against some of them, and as no other provision is made for his costs in the latter contingency against the unsuccessful defendants, it, is perhaps fair to presume, and has been taken for…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Barney Ex Rel. Woodhull v. SaundersSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- Bulkley v. Smith, Brush, & KettletasThe Superior Court of New York City · 1853