In re the Estate of Di Muro

New York Surrogate's Court

In re the Estate of Di Muro

1 Misc. 2d 647, 148 N.Y.S.2d 769, 1956 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2145

DecidedFebruary 16, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Misc. 2d 647 (In re the Estate of Di Muro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Surrogate's Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Estate of Di Muro, 1 Misc. 2d 647, 148 N.Y.S.2d 769, 1956 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2145 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

McGrath, S.

This is an application by a successful respondent for leave to make the order of the Appellate Division the order of this court and to tax the costs awarded by the appellate court. The unsuccessful appellant requests this court to disallow the item of $40 for argument in the Appellate Division because the appeal was submitted by both sides and he argues that when the statute speaks of costs “ for argument ”, it means oral argument only.

The contention of the appellant is without merit. The court is of the opinion that a submission of an appeal on the merits without oral argument is an argument within the provisions of section 1508 (subd. 1, par. b) of the Civil Practice Act and the successful party, if allowed costs by the appellate court, is entitled to costs for argument even if the case is submitted without oral argument (Malcolm v. Hamill, 65 How. Prac. 506; Matter of Wray Drug Co., 93 App. Div. 456, 458).

Costs taxed accordingly and order signed.

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

McGrath, S.

This is an application by a successful respondent for leave to make the order of the Appellate Division the order of this court and to tax the costs awarded by the appellate court. The unsuccessful appellant requests this court to disallow the item of $40 for argument in the Appellate Division because the appeal was submitted by both sides and he argues that when the statute speaks of costs “ for argument ”, it means oral argument only.

The contention of the appellant is without merit. The court is of the opinion that a submission of an appeal on the merits without oral argument is an argument within the provisions of section 1508 (subd. 1, par. b) of the Civil Practice Act and the successful party, if allowed costs by the appellate court, is entitled to costs for argument even if the case is submitted without oral argument (Malcolm v. Hamill, 65 How. Prac. 506; Matter of Wray Drug Co., 93 App. Div. 456, 458).

Costs taxed accordingly and order signed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Misc. 2d 647, 148 N.Y.S.2d 769, 1956 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-estate-of-di-muro-nysurct-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack