Robinson v. Taylor
12 Wend. 191
Opinion
By the Court,
The discontinuance without payment of costs was a nullity. The defendant having, previous to the rule for discontinuance, incurred costs by the retainer of his attorney, the plaintiff, on discontinuing his cause, was bound to pay such costs. On receiving notice of retainer, he should have ascertained when the defendant’s attorney was employed, and if employed before the entry of the rule for discontinuance, he should have paid the defendant’s costs.
Motion granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Robinson v. Taylor, 12 Wend. 191 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1834).
12 Wend. 191 (Robinson v. Taylor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Weigan v. Held
3 Abb. Pr. 462 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1856)
Hull v. Peters
7 Barb. 331 (New York Supreme Court, 1849)
Smith v. White
7 Hill & Den. 520 (New York Supreme Court, 1844)
White v. Smith
4 Hill & Den. 166 (Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, 1843)
Harden v. Hardick
2 Hill & Den. 384 (New York Supreme Court, 1842)