Aikins v. Colton
3 Wend. 326
Opinion
By the Court,
The taxing officer properly rejected those charges. The payment of the money into court was an admission of the plaintiff’s demand to that amount. The plaintiff, therefore, had a good cause of action until the payment of the money, and until then the defendant had no defence. The defendant is entitled only to the costs incurred in the defence subsequent to the payment of the money into court. (2 Barnes, 230. 1 T. R. 629. id 710. 8 T. R. 408.) The motion, therefore, is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Aikins v. Colton, 3 Wend. 326 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1829).
3 Wend. 326 (Aikins v. Colton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Wilson v. Doran
46 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 88 (New York Supreme Court, 1886)
New-York Dry Dock Co. v. M'Intosh
5 Hill & Den. 505 (New York Supreme Court, 1843)