Hinckley v. Boardman

3 Cai. Cas. 134
New York Supreme Court·Decided August 15, 1805·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Kent, C. J.

He should have appeared and contested the taxing. His not doing so is a waiver of his right. Had it been otherwise, I should think the costs of the common pleas only were recoverable, though we certainly might have allowed supreme court costs had we pleased so to do. As things are, you can take nothing by your motion, and must pay the costs of resisting.

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

Hinckley v. Boardman, 3 Cai. Cas. 134 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1805).

3 Cai. Cas. 134 (Hinckley v. Boardman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Crane v. Gurnee
71 A. 338 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1908)
Lott v. Krakauer
1 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 60 (New York Marine Court, 1878)