Low v. Vrooman
This text of 15 Johns. 238 (Low v. Vrooman) 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.
Opinion
. The reference to the surveyors was by mutual consent of the parties, and the costs attending the [239]*239survey were not such as could be taxed in the bill of costs, without some special agreement on the subject. The evidence on the question, whether the expenses were to be borne mutually by the parties, is rather doubtful, but such a conclusion may very fairly be drawn from the circumstances given in evidence, and it was so understood by one of the surveyors. It was an expense incurred for the mutual benefit of both, and it is just and equitable that each one should bear his proportion. Had this been a charge which might have been taxed against the losing party, and which v had been struck out of the hill of costs improperly, the remedy ought to have been by appeal from the taxation; but not being such a charge, there is no remedy, except by action. We cannot see that any principle of law has been violated, and the real and substantial justice of the case being in support of the judgment, it must be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
If no directions are given respecting the costs of an award, they are to be paid by both parties equally. Grove v. Cox, 1 Taunt. 165.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
15 Johns. 238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/low-v-vrooman-nysupct-1818.