Guckenheimer v. Angevine

New York Supreme Court

Guckenheimer v. Angevine

23 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 453

DecidedJanuary 15, 1879

StatusPublished

This text of 23 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 453 (Guckenheimer v. Angevine) 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

Guckenheimer v. Angevine, 23 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 453 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1879).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH. J. :

It is well-settled that laches in motions for retaxation is a defence. (McLean v. Forward, 1 Cow., 49; Morris v. Mullett, 1 Johns. Ch. R., 44.) It appears that the costs had been put into judgment, and that the defendant appealed from the judgment and gave an undertaking for their payment. We think the appeal was a waiver of the right to move for a retaxation; and on the merits vve are of the opinion that the plaintiffs were entitled to the argument fee given by statute for each argument. It does not appear that the necessity for a reargiunent was caused by any act or omission on their part, and two arguments having been in fact made, we think the items were properly taxed.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Talcott, P. J., and IIardiN, J., concurred.

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

SMITH. J. :

It is well-settled that laches in motions for retaxation is a defence. (McLean v. Forward, 1 Cow., 49; Morris v. Mullett, 1 Johns. Ch. R., 44.) It appears that the costs had been put into judgment, and that the defendant appealed from the judgment and gave an undertaking for their payment. We think the appeal was a waiver of the right to move for a retaxation; and on the merits vve are of the opinion that the plaintiffs were entitled to the argument fee given by statute for each argument. It does not appear that the necessity for a reargiunent was caused by any act or omission on their part, and two arguments having been in fact made, we think the items were properly taxed.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Talcott, P. J., and IIardiN, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guckenheimer-v-angevine-nysupct-1879.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack