Reade v. Halpin

180 A.D. 161, 167 N.Y.S. 482, 1917 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9391
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 14, 1917
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 180 A.D. 161 (Reade v. Halpin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reade v. Halpin, 180 A.D. 161, 167 N.Y.S. 482, 1917 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9391 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Sewell, J.:

This action was brought to recover damages for malicious prosecution. All of the defendants appeared by the same attorney and united in an answer.' At the trial a verdict was rendered in favor of the defendant Freeman H. Munson, but the jury were unable to agree upon a verdict as to the other defendants. Judgment was entered dismissing the complaint on the merits as to that defendant and a full bill of costs was taxed against the plaintiff and included in the judgment. (See Reade v. Halpin, 180 App. Div. 157.)

The rule seems to be well settled that where the cause of action set out in the complaint is joint and several and the [162]*162defendants have answered jointly only one judgment may be entered in an action at law. In such a case a defendant’s right to costs is regulated by section 3229 of the Code of Civil Procedure. By the express provisions of that section if the plaintiff ultimately succeeds in the action against one or more defendants, but not against all of them, none of the defendants are entitled to costs as a matter of course.

Our attention has not been called to any authority for the contention that the verdict of a jury in favor of the defendant, in an action like the present, constituted a severance of the action. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the plaintiff is entitled to have the defendants’ costs retaxed, and disallowed and the judgment modified by striking therefrom the award of costs against the plaintiff.

Order modified by striking therefrom the award of costs against the plaintiff, and as modified unanimously affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Related

Schmuckler v. Green
249 A.D. 342 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1937)
Brooklyn National Bank v. John J. Sullivan, Inc.
247 A.D. 285 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1936)
Reade v. Halpin
181 A.D. 916 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
180 A.D. 161, 167 N.Y.S. 482, 1917 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reade-v-halpin-nyappdiv-1917.