Dedekam v. Vose
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
After the affirmance by this court—Dede-kam v. Yose [Case'No. 3,729]—of the decree of the district court in this case [Case No. 3,732], dismissing the libel, the respondents [Francis Vose and others] had their costs on the appeal taxed by the clerk of this court.
Read the full summary
After the affirmance by this court—Dede-kam v. Yose [Case'No. 3,729]—of the decree of the district court in this case [Case No. 3,732], dismissing the libel, the respondents [Francis Vose and others] had their costs on the appeal taxed by the clerk of this court. Among the items allowed and taxed by the clerk were these; (1) “Proctor’s docket fee,' April term, 1853, $20.00.” “Proctor’s docket fee, September term, 1853. $20.00.” (2) “Seventeen depositions read, $42.50.” (3) “Costs on removal to circuit court, $5.” From the taxation of these items the libellant [Andres Dedekam] appealed to this…
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT
held; (1) That one docket fee of $20 to the proctor was allowable, and only one; (2) that the item of $42.50 for the depositions read on appeal was not allowable, because, in cases appealed to this court from the district court, the act of February 26, 1S53 (10 Stat. 161, § 1), applied only to new depositions taken in this court; (3) that the item of $5 on the removal of the cause to tnis court was not allowable, as the removal took place prior to the passage of the act of 1853.
2Cited by7 opinions
- Ferguson v. DentU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Tennessee · 1891
- Goodyear v. SawyerUnited States Circuit Court · 1883
- Coy v. PerkinsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1882
- Cleaver v. Traders' Ins. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1889
- Jerman v. StewartUnited States Circuit Court · 1882
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.