Thomas v. International Silver Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Thomas v. International Silver Co.

84 N.Y.S. 612, 14 N.Y. Ann. Cas. 22

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 6, 1903

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 84 N.Y.S. 612 (Thomas v. International Silver Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Thomas v. International Silver Co., 84 N.Y.S. 612, 14 N.Y. Ann. Cas. 22 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

BLANCHARD, J.

There is nothing in the record on this appeal to show what particular items of the bill of costs the defendant objected to when the bill was before the clerk of the court for taxation. The affidavit of the defendant’s attorney, made after the bill was taxed, indicates only that a general objection to the taxation of any [613]*613costs was interposed. There is no statement of the grounds of objection. The record should show what items in the bill were objected to, and the grounds thereof, in respect to each item objected to. Lotti v. Krakaner, I Civ. Proc. R. 312; Comly v. Mayor, 1 Civ. Proc. R. 306, 317; Matthews v. Matthews (Sup.) 1 N. Y. Supp. 222.

The order denying defendant’s motion for relaxation of costs is affirmed, with costs and disbursements. All concur.

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

BLANCHARD, J.

There is nothing in the record on this appeal to show what particular items of the bill of costs the defendant objected to when the bill was before the clerk of the court for taxation. The affidavit of the defendant’s attorney, made after the bill was taxed, indicates only that a general objection to the taxation of any [613]*613costs was interposed. There is no statement of the grounds of objection. The record should show what items in the bill were objected to, and the grounds thereof, in respect to each item objected to. Lotti v. Krakaner, I Civ. Proc. R. 312; Comly v. Mayor, 1 Civ. Proc. R. 306, 317; Matthews v. Matthews (Sup.) 1 N. Y. Supp. 222.

The order denying defendant’s motion for relaxation of costs is affirmed, with costs and disbursements. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.Y.S. 612, 14 N.Y. Ann. Cas. 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-international-silver-co-nyappterm-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack