Mumford v. Withey
New York Supreme Court
Motion for retaxalion of costs. The action was covenant to recover back the consideration money expressed in a deed on the eviction of a grantee, by virtue of a recovery in ejectment under paramount title. The plaintiff, on the trial of the cause, shewed an exemplification of the record of recovery in the action of ejectment against him, the writ of possession executed, and notice to the defendant of the pendency of the suit.
Read the full summary
Motion for retaxalion of costs. The action was covenant to recover back the consideration money expressed in a deed on the eviction of a grantee, by virtue of a recovery in ejectment under paramount title. The plaintiff, on the trial of the cause, shewed an exemplification of the record of recovery in the action of ejectment against him, the writ of possession executed, and notice to the defendant of the pendency of the suit. The plaintiff obtained a verdict for $221,51, and had supreme court costs taxed, and now produces a certificate of the circuit judge, that the title to land came in…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
The exception in the statute is general, if in any action, freehold or title to lands in any wise comes in question, the plaintiff is not restricted to common pleas costs, though his recovery be less than $250. The plaintiff on the trial was compelled to shew his eviction, and, of course, title out of the defendant. Besides, here the judge has certified the fact, that the title to lands did come in question, and the court will not look beyond the certificate. Whether the title came in question, does not depend upon the state of the pleadings, but upon what…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Barney v. KeithNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Lillis v. O'ConnerNew York Supreme Court · 1876