Bermont v. Serge Elevator Co.

City of New York Municipal Court

Bermont v. Serge Elevator Co.

199 Misc. 825, 106 N.Y.S.2d 933, 1951 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2262

CourtCity of New York Municipal Court

DecidedApril 30, 1951

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 199 Misc. 825 (Bermont v. Serge Elevator Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bermont v. Serge Elevator Co., 199 Misc. 825, 106 N.Y.S.2d 933, 1951 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2262 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

Byrnes, C. J.

Plaintiff failed to appear upon the call of the trial calendar and upon defendant’s motion in open court at that time the action was dismissed. The question for determination is whether defendant should be permitted to tax $30 costs, pursuant to paragraph j of subdivision 3 of section 1504 of the Civil Practice Act, which reads in part: “ For the trial of an issue of fact, thirty dollars ”. “ Trial ” is defined in all standard legal dictionaries as an examination before a com-[826]*826potent tribunal, according to the law of the land, of the facts or law put in issue in a cause, for the purpose of determining such issue. While there are early cases which would support a different view, the present tendency of the courts is correctly stated in Wait’s New York Practice (4th ed., Vol. 4, p. 509) as follows: “ the tendency of the courts is to disallow a trial fee where there has been a dismissal or discontinuance of the action before any trial has been begun. ’ ’

I hold that there has not been a “ trial'of an issue of fact ” herein, and the item of $30 is disallowed (cf. Gallagher v. Surpless, 177 App. Div. 793, and Harris v. Pudney, 93 Misc. 470; see, also, Wrobel v. Call, 142 Misc. 610). The motion is therefore granted, the item of $30 is stricken from the bill of costs, and the clerk of the court is directed to make an appropriate entry to that effect. ■

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

Byrnes, C. J.

Plaintiff failed to appear upon the call of the trial calendar and upon defendant’s motion in open court at that time the action was dismissed. The question for determination is whether defendant should be permitted to tax $30 costs, pursuant to paragraph j of subdivision 3 of section 1504 of the Civil Practice Act, which reads in part: “ For the trial of an issue of fact, thirty dollars ”. “ Trial ” is defined in all standard legal dictionaries as an examination before a com-[826]*826potent tribunal, according to the law of the land, of the facts or law put in issue in a cause, for the purpose of determining such issue. While there are early cases which would support a different view, the present tendency of the courts is correctly stated in Wait’s New York Practice (4th ed., Vol. 4, p. 509) as follows: “ the tendency of the courts is to disallow a trial fee where there has been a dismissal or discontinuance of the action before any trial has been begun. ’ ’

I hold that there has not been a “ trial'of an issue of fact ” herein, and the item of $30 is disallowed (cf. Gallagher v. Surpless, 177 App. Div. 793, and Harris v. Pudney, 93 Misc. 470; see, also, Wrobel v. Call, 142 Misc. 610). The motion is therefore granted, the item of $30 is stricken from the bill of costs, and the clerk of the court is directed to make an appropriate entry to that effect. ■

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 Misc. 825, 106 N.Y.S.2d 933, 1951 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bermont-v-serge-elevator-co-nynyccityct-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack