Felcher v. Arace

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Felcher v. Arace

164 So. 2d 569, 1964 Fla. App. LEXIS 4307

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 2, 1964

DocketNo. 64-272

StatusPublished

This text of 164 So. 2d 569 (Felcher v. Arace) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Felcher v. Arace, 164 So. 2d 569, 1964 Fla. App. LEXIS 4307 (Fla. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before us on a petition under Rule 3.16, F.A.R., 31 F.S.A., to review a cost order. As the losing parties in a law action the costs were adjudged against the defendants. They now challenge inclusion of the cost of a discovery deposition of the defendant Joseph A. Arace. The deposition was not taken in the present case. It was taken and filed in a prior case which had been terminated. The deposition represented a cost item in the case in which it was taken and filed, and not in the subsequent case. Gamble Robinson Commission Co. v. Union Pac. R. Co., 180 Ill.App. 256, 268, aff’d, 262 Ill. 400, 104 N.E. 666, Ann.Cas.1915B, 89. Accordingly, the order to which the petition is directed is modified to eliminate the said item of $34.70, being the cost of the deposition in question.

It is so ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before us on a petition under Rule 3.16, F.A.R., 31 F.S.A., to review a cost order. As the losing parties in a law action the costs were adjudged against the defendants. They now challenge inclusion of the cost of a discovery deposition of the defendant Joseph A. Arace. The deposition was not taken in the present case. It was taken and filed in a prior case which had been terminated. The deposition represented a cost item in the case in which it was taken and filed, and not in the subsequent case. Gamble Robinson Commission Co. v. Union Pac. R. Co., 180 Ill.App. 256, 268, aff’d, 262 Ill. 400, 104 N.E. 666, Ann.Cas.1915B, 89. Accordingly, the order to which the petition is directed is modified to eliminate the said item of $34.70, being the cost of the deposition in question.

It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 So. 2d 569, 1964 Fla. App. LEXIS 4307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/felcher-v-arace-fladistctapp-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack