Musser v. Good
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
in error. Writ of error to. Lancaster county. The plaintiffs in error brought suit against the defendants in error, on a promissory note. After it had been pending some time, judgment of nonpros, was entered, in consequence of the decision of this .court in the case of Seidenbender v. Charles, 4 Serg. Sp Raiole, 151, that land lotteries were illegal, having rendered void the plaintiffs’ cause of action.
Read the full summary
in error. Writ of error to. Lancaster county. The plaintiffs in error brought suit against the defendants in error, on a promissory note. After it had been pending some time, judgment of nonpros, was entered, in consequence of the decision of this .court in the case of Seidenbender v. Charles, 4 Serg. Sp Raiole, 151, that land lotteries were illegal, having rendered void the plaintiffs’ cause of action. The defendants then issued a ft. fa. for the costs, to be levied de bonis propriis of the plaintiffs. The costs endorsed on the writ, were the fees of the prothonotary, the sheriff, the crier,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gibson, J.
This writ of error has been taken without adverting to the fact, that costs and fees are altogether different in their nature. Costs are an allowance to & party, for expenses incurred in conducting his suit: fees are a compensation to an officer, for services rendered in the progress of the cause. It may well be, therefore, that a defendant shall not recover costs out of the pocket of an executor or administrator, and yet an officer who has performed services at the instance of such executor or administrator, have a personal demand against…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Muntorf v. MuntorfSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828