History
  • No items yet
midpage
Slocum v. Lansing
3 Denio 259
N.Y. Sup. Ct.
1846
Check Treatment
By the Court, Bronson, Ch., J

As the defendant was required it ,»sts, the granting uf the new trial must have been considered i £T??~ of favor rather than of strict right; and the defendant cannot be entitled to t le costs of his proceedings to obtain the favor.(a)

Motion granted.

So where a plaintiff pays costs of a circuit for not proceeding to trial pursuant to notice, and afterwards recovers in the suit, he cannot tax his own costs of that *260circuit. (Linacre v. Lush, 3 Wend. 305.) But where a new trial is granted at the instance of the plaintiff, the costs to abide the result, and the defendant recovers, he is entitled to his costs of opposing the motion for a new trial. (Coon v. Thurman, 2 Hill, 357.)

Case Details

Case Name: Slocum v. Lansing
Court Name: New York Supreme Court
Date Published: Sep 15, 1846
Citation: 3 Denio 259
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. Sup. Ct.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.