History
  • No items yet
midpage
Work v. Mallory
25 Miss. 172
Miss.
1852
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

These cases present these questions: first, whether, when a case is dismissed in this court for want of jurisdiction, the party who filed the record and prosecuted the writ of error or appeal is liable to be taxed with the costs of the suit? We have fully considered this question, and respond in the affirmative.

The second question is, whether the costs of the transcript of the record, charged in the inferior court, should be taxed in this court as a part of the costs of the suit? When the acts of 10th February, 1844, (Hutch. Code, 486,) and the act of March 2d, 1833, (Hutch. Code, 932,) are taken in conjunction, we think that .it may be properly ruled, that the costs of such transcript should be taxed in the bill of costs in this court.

Case Details

Case Name: Work v. Mallory
Court Name: Mississippi Supreme Court
Date Published: Oct 15, 1852
Citation: 25 Miss. 172
Court Abbreviation: Miss.
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.