Sturgis v. . Spofford
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, affirming an order of Special Term directing a retaxation of defendants’ costs. This action was brought to recover penalties for violations of the pilotage law. Defendants before answering made an offer of judgment, under section 385 of the Code, of $100 and interest, with costs. The offer was refused.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, affirming an order of Special Term directing a retaxation of defendants’ costs. This action was brought to recover penalties for violations of the pilotage law. Defendants before answering made an offer of judgment, under section 385 of the Code, of $100 and interest, with costs. The offer was refused. Plaintiffs recovered at Circuit forty-six penalties, i. e., $4,600. The judgment was affirmed at General Term. Defendants appealed to the Court of Appeals where the judgment was reversed, except as to…
1Opinion of the CourtGrover, J.
The counsel for the appellants insists that the order is not' appealable to this court, and that the question involved therein and determined thereby can only be reviewed here upon appeal from the judgment. I think it comes directly within the fourth subdivision of section 11 of the Code. The right to costs is substantial, and when claimed by a party, as in the present case, by the positive provision of the statute, does not involve any question of discretion. The action was for the recovery of money only, and the judgment finally recovered by the respondents was less favorable than that…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Bathgate v. . HaskinNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Riggs v. . WaydellNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Crosby v. . StephanNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Gasz v. StrickSuperior Court of Buffalo · 1888
- McNamara v. NolanNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.