Bentley v. City of Amsterdam

New York Supreme Court

Bentley v. City of Amsterdam

145 Misc. 2d 499, 546 N.Y.S.2d 801, 1989 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 681

DecidedOctober 17, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 145 Misc. 2d 499 (Bentley v. City of Amsterdam) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bentley v. City of Amsterdam, 145 Misc. 2d 499, 546 N.Y.S.2d 801, 1989 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 681 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

John A. Simone, Jr., J.

The defendant, Greenhill Cemetery Association, following the dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint submitted a bill of costs which were taxed and a judgment was entered thereon. Included as a disbursement of the defendant was an item amounting to $3,437.09 representing the cost of a survey of a portion of the lands owned by the defendant, Greenhill Cemetery Association. The plaintiff by way of motion objects to the inclusion of this item as a disbursement of the defendant in the bill of costs and judgment.

The defendant on the other hand maintains that the survey was prepared for the purpose of cross-examining plaintiff’s expert at the trial. However, the plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed at the close of his case and the defendant did not have need for such survey nor was such survey introduced into evidence at the trial.

[500]*500Should this court allow the amount of $3,437.09 to remain in the bill of costs and judgment as a proper disbursement?

In Mark v City of Buffalo (87 NY 184), the Court of Appeals affirmed the disallowance of the sum of over $2,000 for certain plans and measurements which had been taxed as necessary disbursements.

In Jenkins v Marsh (136 Misc 291), the Supreme Court of Monroe County disallowed the taxation as costs of an item for a map which was not introduced into evidence but was attached to a brief of one of the defendants.

Since the survey in question was not used in court as part of this proceeding, the court answers the question before it in the negative and will disallow said item as a necessary disbursement. The motion of the plaintiff is granted, with costs of $50. The judgment should be corrected and amended accordingly.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

John A. Simone, Jr., J.

The defendant, Greenhill Cemetery Association, following the dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint submitted a bill of costs which were taxed and a judgment was entered thereon. Included as a disbursement of the defendant was an item amounting to $3,437.09 representing the cost of a survey of a portion of the lands owned by the defendant, Greenhill Cemetery Association. The plaintiff by way of motion objects to the inclusion of this item as a disbursement of the defendant in the bill of costs and judgment.

The defendant on the other hand maintains that the survey was prepared for the purpose of cross-examining plaintiff’s expert at the trial. However, the plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed at the close of his case and the defendant did not have need for such survey nor was such survey introduced into evidence at the trial.

[500]*500Should this court allow the amount of $3,437.09 to remain in the bill of costs and judgment as a proper disbursement?

In Mark v City of Buffalo (87 NY 184), the Court of Appeals affirmed the disallowance of the sum of over $2,000 for certain plans and measurements which had been taxed as necessary disbursements.

In Jenkins v Marsh (136 Misc 291), the Supreme Court of Monroe County disallowed the taxation as costs of an item for a map which was not introduced into evidence but was attached to a brief of one of the defendants.

Since the survey in question was not used in court as part of this proceeding, the court answers the question before it in the negative and will disallow said item as a necessary disbursement. The motion of the plaintiff is granted, with costs of $50. The judgment should be corrected and amended accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 Misc. 2d 499, 546 N.Y.S.2d 801, 1989 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 681, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bentley-v-city-of-amsterdam-nysupct-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack