Fairlie v. Lowson

5 Cow. 424
New York Supreme Court·Decided May 15, 1826·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Curia.

The taxing officer was right in both particulars, In case of an action on a bond, other than for the payment °f money; (and indeed where it is for the payment of money except where it is met by a set off, in which case the J r J ’ [425]*425condition is to be the measure of the judgment, (1 R. L. 515, 16,) the penalty is the criterion of cost. If that be more than $250, supreme court costs are allowed. (2 Cowen’s Rep. 412.)

Interest is not allowable where it will swell the recovery to, or, in effect, compel the defendants to pay, in the whole, an amount beyond the penalty of a bond, especially against a surety. (Clark v. Bush, 3 Cowen, 151.)

Taxation affirmed.

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

Fairlie v. Lowson, 5 Cow. 424 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1826).

5 Cow. 424 (Fairlie v. Lowson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Graeter v. DeWolf
13 N.E. 111 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1887)
State ex rel. Moore v. Sandusky
46 Mo. 377 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1870)
Syracuse City Bank v. Coville
19 How. Pr. 385 (New York Supreme Court, 1860)
Lawrence v. United States
15 F. Cas. 81 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Michigan, 1841)
Harris v. Clap
1 Mass. 308 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1805)