Docket No. L.A. 8040. | Cal. | Sep 16, 1925
THE COURT.
This was an inheritance tax case. The decision of this court in reversing the judgment made no provision for the recovery of costs. The clerk, however, issued a remittitur containing the provision "the appellants to recover costs of appeal." The present motion is to recall the remittitur and to strike from it the last-named provision. The motion is, therefore, limited to the question as to whether or not the costs on appeal were recoverable against this respondent. The inheritance tax statute (Stats. 1921, p. 1520), section 17, subdivision 5, provides with reference to the state controller "that no undertaking shall be required from or costs charged against the state controller in any such proceeding." The statute was read into our decision and was a part of it. Rule 23 of this court could not, of course, prevail as against the statute. It follows, therefore, that the insertion of the words "appellants to recover costs of appeal" was in violation of the statute, was no part of our judgment, and was an inadvertence on the part of the clerk. The cases cited are not out of harmony touching this subject. The case of Peterson v. Civil Service Board,
The motion is granted. The remittitur is recalled for the purpose of striking therefrom the provision "The appellant to recover costs on appeal" and as corrected is ordered to issue forthwith.