Slocum v. Lansing
This text of 3 Denio 259 (Slocum v. Lansing) 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.
Opinion
As the defendant was required it ,»sts, the granting uf the new trial must have been considered i £T??~ of favor rather than of strict right; and the defendant cannot be entitled to t le costs of his proceedings to obtain the favor.
Motion granted.
So where a plaintiff pays costs of a circuit for not proceeding to trial pursuant to notice, and afterwards recovers in the suit, he cannot tax his own costs of that [260]*260circuit. (Linacre v. Lush, 3 Wend. 305.) But where a new trial is granted at the instance of the plaintiff, the costs to abide the result, and the defendant recovers, he is entitled to his costs of opposing the motion for a new trial. (Coon v. Thurman, 2 Hill, 357.)
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Denio 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slocum-v-lansing-nysupct-1846.