Powers v. Manhattan Railway Co.

Superior Court of New York

Powers v. Manhattan Railway Co.

14 N.Y.S. 130

CourtThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo

DecidedSeptember 15, 1890

StatusPublished

This text of 14 N.Y.S. 130 (Powers v. Manhattan Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Powers v. Manhattan Railway Co., 14 N.Y.S. 130 (superctny 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Dugro, J.

The words “with costs to abide the event,” used in the remittitur, include the costs taxed by the clerk. First Nat. Bank v. Fourth Nat. Bank, 84 N. Y. 469. The costs at general and trial term were not discretionary, as the action is one of those specified in section 3228 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Many of the cases referred to upon defendant’s brief were such as come within subdivision 2 of section 3238, and have no relevancy to the point presented by this appeal from the clerk.

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

Dugro, J.

The words “with costs to abide the event,” used in the remittitur, include the costs taxed by the clerk. First Nat. Bank v. Fourth Nat. Bank, 84 N. Y. 469. The costs at general and trial term were not discretionary, as the action is one of those specified in section 3228 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Many of the cases referred to upon defendant’s brief were such as come within subdivision 2 of section 3238, and have no relevancy to the point presented by this appeal from the clerk.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 N.Y.S. 130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powers-v-manhattan-railway-co-superctny-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack