Barnes v. Roosevelt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Barnes v. Roosevelt

166 A.D. 943, 151 N.Y.S. 322, 1915 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6514

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 15, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 166 A.D. 943 (Barnes v. Roosevelt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barnes v. Roosevelt, 166 A.D. 943, 151 N.Y.S. 322, 1915 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6514 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Ten dollars costs and the disbursements were allowed to the appellant according to the usual practice in this court on such motions. This motion, for a resettlement of the order, calls attention to facts which, in our judgment, should take this case from the ordinary rule. The disbursements, as taxed, amount to §303.67, which are principally for printing the record. A great part of the printed record was occupied by the defendant’s effort to establish that the officials of Albany county, charged with the duty of preparing jury lists and drawing a jury, would not fairly perform that duty, and with the plaintiff’s reply to that charge. Defendant wholly failed in that contention. Under the circumstances it seems proper that the costs and disbursements awarded to the appellant should abide the event of the action. The motion is, therefore, granted. All concurred. Motion granted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

Ten dollars costs and the disbursements were allowed to the appellant according to the usual practice in this court on such motions. This motion, for a resettlement of the order, calls attention to facts which, in our judgment, should take this case from the ordinary rule. The disbursements, as taxed, amount to §303.67, which are principally for printing the record. A great part of the printed record was occupied by the defendant’s effort to establish that the officials of Albany county, charged with the duty of preparing jury lists and drawing a jury, would not fairly perform that duty, and with the plaintiff’s reply to that charge. Defendant wholly failed in that contention. Under the circumstances it seems proper that the costs and disbursements awarded to the appellant should abide the event of the action. The motion is, therefore, granted. All concurred. Motion granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 A.D. 943, 151 N.Y.S. 322, 1915 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnes-v-roosevelt-nyappdiv-1915.