121 N.Y.S. 850 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1910
The plaintiff appeals from an order affirming the report of a referee, and lixing the amount of damages suffered by defendant in consequence of an injunction pendente lite.
The plaintiff was a stockholder in defendant having paid in $6,500 on account of a $10,000 subscription. The purpose of the action was to restrain defendant from enforcing payment of the balance of the subscription, and incidentally to recover certain sums claimed to be due for rent and salary. An injunction pendente lite was granted upon motion after argument. At the trial the complaint was dismissed. Thereupon a motion was made to ascertain and determine the damages' sustained by defendant by reason of the
First. It is undoubtedly the general rule that counsel fees for preparing for trial and trying the cause are not allowable as part of the damages sustained by reason of an in junction pendente lite. A well-recognized exception to this rule is found, however, in cases wherein, the -defendant is forced to trial in order to get rid of the injunction, and the- liability for counsel fees upon the trial is incurred solely or principally because of the injunction. (Andrews v. Glenville Woolen Company, 50 N. Y. 282; Youngs v. McDonald, 56 App. Div. 14; affd., 166 N. Y. 639.) Such was the case here. The injunction having been granted on motion and after argument, there was nothing that defendant could do except to submit to it until the trial. The authorities cited by appellant, and which are claimed to state a different rule, rest in the main upon Hovey v. Rubber-Tip Pencil Co. (50 N. Y. 335) and Newton v. Russell (87 id. 527). In these cases the refusal to allow counsel fees by way of damages was based upon the failure of the defendant to exhaust all available means to procure a dissolution of the temporary injunction before trial.
Second. The right to recover as part of the damages counsel fees upon the reference to ascertain the damages, is well settled.
Third. The general taxable costs'in the action constitute no part of the damages sustained by reason of the injunction, and should riot have been deducted from the damage found by the referee. In Harrison v. Harrison (75 Hun, 191) the referee had erroneously included in the damages the amount of the general costs of the action, and the court, on appeal, struck them out. In the present case the referee did not so include them.
The order appealed from is affirmed, with costs and disbursements.
Clarke, McLaughlin, Laughlin and Dowling, JJ., concurred.
Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.