History
  • No items yet
midpage
Davis v. Hastings
62 Mass. 313
Mass.
1851
Check Treatment
Shaw, C. J.

It is now settled, though formerly it was considered otherwise, that where an action is dismissed on motion for want of jurisdiction, the defendant is entitled to costs. Cary v. Daniels, 5 Met. 236 ; Jordan v. Dennis, 7 Met. 590; Hunt v. Hanover, 8 Met. 343. The only question in the present case is, whether the defendants having pleaded severally are entitled to several costs; and we think they are, having pleaded and moved severally. Mason v. Waite, 1 Pick. 456; Ewer v. Beard, 3 Pick. 64; West v. Brock, 3 Pick. 303 ; Fales v. Stone. 9 Met. 316.

*315In taxing several costs for the defendants, however, it will be understood, that expenses incurred for the use of all, as depositions and the like, for the common benefit, can be taxed against the plaintiff but once only.

Case Details

Case Name: Davis v. Hastings
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Oct 15, 1851
Citation: 62 Mass. 313
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
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.