Tae Troy City Bank v. Grant

1 How. Pr. 135
New York Supreme Court·Decided April 15, 1845·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Bronson, Chief Justice.

One third the amount of attorney and coun[136]*136sel fees as taxed must be deducted. We have always held that the “ recovery” within the meaning of the act regulating costs, is the recovery for damages. If the plaintiff gets interest on his verdict, it is by taxation as costs. The verdict must govern, nnd the circumstance that proceedings have been stayed by case or bill of exceptions makes no difference.

Rule, deducting one-third attorney and counsel fee.

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

Tae Troy City Bank v. Grant, 1 How. Pr. 135 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1845).

1 How. Pr. 135 (Tae Troy City Bank v. Grant) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Warner Weather-Master of Westchester, Inc. v. Strom
44 Misc. 2d 478 (New York County Courts, 1964)
Scoville v. Kent
8 Abb. Pr. 17 (New York Supreme Court, 1868)