Bartels v. Redfield

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Bartels v. Redfield

47 F. 708, 1891 U.S. App. LEXIS 1498

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedOctober 9, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 47 F. 708 (Bartels v. Redfield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bartels v. Redfield, 47 F. 708, 1891 U.S. App. LEXIS 1498 (circtsdny 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Lacombe, Circuit Judge,

(orally.) The rule is that costs follow recovery, and I see no reason why there should be any exception here. The silence of the supreme court as to costs of this court is not significant, in view of the tact that the subject was not presented to it. Judgment should therefore be entered for the plaintiffs for the amount of the sums and the interest thereon specified in the opinion and the mandate of the supreme court, together with the aforesaid $690.50, costs and disbursements of this court.

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

Lacombe, Circuit Judge,

(orally.) The rule is that costs follow recovery, and I see no reason why there should be any exception here. The silence of the supreme court as to costs of this court is not significant, in view of the tact that the subject was not presented to it. Judgment should therefore be entered for the plaintiffs for the amount of the sums and the interest thereon specified in the opinion and the mandate of the supreme court, together with the aforesaid $690.50, costs and disbursements of this court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 F. 708, 1891 U.S. App. LEXIS 1498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bartels-v-redfield-circtsdny-1891.