Rider v. Hubbell

New York Supreme Court

Rider v. Hubbell

4 Wend. 201

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1830

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 4 Wend. 201 (Rider v. Hubbell) 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

Rider v. Hubbell, 4 Wend. 201 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1830).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

that the defendants were entitled to but single costs ; that double costs in cases of this kind were not allowed on interlocutory proceedings; they being given by the statute, (1 R. L. 155,) only in cases of a verdict for the-defendant, or of the plaintiff’s becoming nonsuit, or suffering a discontinuance. The statute does not extend to giving double costs to a defendant even on a judgment in his favor on demurrer. (5 Johns R. 182. 9 id. 254.) And costs on a motion for judgment as in case of nonsuit, in a case of this land have been adjudged to be only single. (3 Johns. R. 443.)

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

By the Court,

that the defendants were entitled to but single costs ; that double costs in cases of this kind were not allowed on interlocutory proceedings; they being given by the statute, (1 R. L. 155,) only in cases of a verdict for the-defendant, or of the plaintiff’s becoming nonsuit, or suffering a discontinuance. The statute does not extend to giving double costs to a defendant even on a judgment in his favor on demurrer. (5 Johns R. 182. 9 id. 254.) And costs on a motion for judgment as in case of nonsuit, in a case of this land have been adjudged to be only single. (3 Johns. R. 443.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Wend. 201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rider-v-hubbell-nysupct-1830.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack