Greenbaum v. Berenson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greenbaum v. Berenson

217 A.D. 774

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1926·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Order granting defendants’ motion to retax costs reversed upon the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The allowance of the item in defendants’ costs of their disbursements of seventy dollars for premium upon a surety bond filed by them is unauthorized by the Civil Practice Act, and is contrary to the decisions made under that act and the Code of Civil Procedure. Had a surety company bond been ordered by the court the situation presented would have been different. Kelly, P. J., Manning, Young, Kapper and Lazansky, JJ., concur.

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

Order granting defendants’ motion to retax costs reversed upon the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The allowance of the item in defendants’ costs of their disbursements of seventy dollars for premium upon a surety bond filed by them is unauthorized by the Civil Practice Act, and is contrary to the decisions made under that act and the Code of Civil Procedure. Had a surety company bond been ordered by the court the situation presented would have been different. Kelly, P. J., Manning, Young, Kapper and Lazansky, JJ., concur.

Greenbaum v. Berenson, 217 A.D. 774 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

217 A.D. 774 (Greenbaum v. Berenson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related