Raff v. Koster, Bial & Co.

New York Supreme Court

Raff v. Koster, Bial & Co.

27 Misc. 47, 57 N.Y.S. 252

DecidedMarch 15, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 27 Misc. 47 (Raff v. Koster, Bial & Co.) 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.

Bluebook

Raff v. Koster, Bial & Co., 27 Misc. 47, 57 N.Y.S. 252 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Giegerich, J.

Upon taxation of the costs after an appeal the clerk reduced the items claimed for printing disbursements in a substantial amount, the reduction being based solely upon the taxing officer’s own view as to the proper charge for printing, after his examination of the printed, papers. The bill of costs was verified as to the necessity of the disbursements, but not as to the reasonableness of the items thereof; and the printer’s bills were produced in support of the items for printing, While the taxing officer was warranted in disallowing the items as presented, because they were not satisfactorily shown to be “ reasonable in amount,” in conformity with the requirements of section 3267 of the Code of Civil Procedure, he had no authority, in the absence of proof, to allow the sum he did therefor. Comy v. Mayor, 1 Civ. Pro. 306, 317; Lottin v. Krakaer, id. 312, 313; note s. c., 1 City Ct. Rep. 60, 61. As the matter now stands, there is nothing to support the action taken by the clerk. Therefore, a new taxation is ordered before him upon such affidavits as to the reasonableness of these items as the parties may present.. The item of $10 for costs paid [48]*48by' the defendant upon the motion which was the subject of the appeal was properly disallowed. No costs of this motion to either party.

Ordered accordingly,

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

Giegerich, J.

Upon taxation of the costs after an appeal the clerk reduced the items claimed for printing disbursements in a substantial amount, the reduction being based solely upon the taxing officer’s own view as to the proper charge for printing, after his examination of the printed, papers. The bill of costs was verified as to the necessity of the disbursements, but not as to the reasonableness of the items thereof; and the printer’s bills were produced in support of the items for printing, While the taxing officer was warranted in disallowing the items as presented, because they were not satisfactorily shown to be “ reasonable in amount,” in conformity with the requirements of section 3267 of the Code of Civil Procedure, he had no authority, in the absence of proof, to allow the sum he did therefor. Comy v. Mayor, 1 Civ. Pro. 306, 317; Lottin v. Krakaer, id. 312, 313; note s. c., 1 City Ct. Rep. 60, 61. As the matter now stands, there is nothing to support the action taken by the clerk. Therefore, a new taxation is ordered before him upon such affidavits as to the reasonableness of these items as the parties may present.. The item of $10 for costs paid [48]*48by' the defendant upon the motion which was the subject of the appeal was properly disallowed. No costs of this motion to either party.

Ordered accordingly,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 Misc. 47, 57 N.Y.S. 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raff-v-koster-bial-co-nysupct-1899.