Lasky v. Davis

33 Cal. 677
California Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1867·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

By the Court, Sanderson, J.:

An order made on a motion to retax costs is not appeal-able. It is not an order made after final judgment within the meaning of section three hundred and forty-three of the Practice Act, even though it be made after the entry of judgment, for in legal effect the order, if the motion is granted, amounts to a modification or amendment of the judgment, or in other words becomes a j3art of it. If the motion is denied the error .is none the less in the judgment, and can be reviewed only upon an appeal from the judgment. Costs are included in and constitute a part of the judgment, (Sec. 511,) and hence, though ascertained and adjudged by the Court after an entry of the judgment by the Clerk may have been made, yet the law considers such action of the Court as having preceded the final judgment. (Votan v. Reese, 20 Cal. 90; Levy v. Getleson, 27 Cal. 688; Stevenson v. Smith, 28 Cal. 105.)

The appeal is dismissed.

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

Lasky v. Davis, 33 Cal. 677 (Cal. 1867).

33 Cal. 677 (Lasky v. Davis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Markart v. Zeimer
239 P. 856 (California Court of Appeal, 1925)
In Re Kling
292 P. 453 (California Court of Appeal, 1920)
Granite Mountain Mining Co. v. Weinstein
7 Mont. 346 (Montana Supreme Court, 1888)
Empire Gold Mining Co. v. Bonanza Gold Mining Co.
7 P. 810 (California Supreme Court, 1885)
Rader v. Nottingham
2 Mont. 157 (Montana Supreme Court, 1874)
Flubacher v. Kelly
49 Cal. 116 (California Supreme Court, 1874)
Dooly v. Norton
41 Cal. 439 (California Supreme Court, 1871)