Marx v. Manhattan Ry. Co.

3 N.Y.S. 113, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 495
CourtNew York Circuit Court
DecidedNovember 28, 1888
StatusPublished

This text of 3 N.Y.S. 113 (Marx v. Manhattan Ry. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Marx v. Manhattan Ry. Co., 3 N.Y.S. 113, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 495 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1888).

Opinion

Barrett, J.

As the plaintiff sued as a poor person, no costs could have been recovered against him, nor could the court have granted an extra allowance against him. Under such circumstances, it does not seem to be just to burden the defendant with an extra allowance. The attorney for the plaintiff testified that in the common pleas action he had an agreement for one-quarter of the recovery, and that in the present action he was to receive a reasonable compensation for his services. The plaintiff can therefore recompense him out of the recovery, which is substantial. In my judgment, therefore, the application for an extra allowance should be denied.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 N.Y.S. 113, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marx-v-manhattan-ry-co-nycirct-1888.