Van Alstyne v. Richmond

New York Supreme Court

Van Alstyne v. Richmond

5 Hill & Den. 556

DecidedSeptember 15, 1843

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Hill & Den. 556 (Van Alstyne v. Richmond) 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

Van Alstyne v. Richmond, 5 Hill & Den. 556 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1843).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court, Cowen, J.

The provisions of the statute concerning fees for attorney and counsel on the argument of special motions, (Sess. L. of ’40, p. 327, 330,) have no application to motions at the circuit. They are confined to non-enumerated motions. These words comprehend such motions only as are made at bar, out of the order of the calendar. The commissioner erred in allowing the items mentioned; and the motion to re-tax is therefore granted.

Ordered accordingly.

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

By the Court, Cowen, J.

The provisions of the statute concerning fees for attorney and counsel on the argument of special motions, (Sess. L. of ’40, p. 327, 330,) have no application to motions at the circuit. They are confined to non-enumerated motions. These words comprehend such motions only as are made at bar, out of the order of the calendar. The commissioner erred in allowing the items mentioned; and the motion to re-tax is therefore granted.

Ordered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Hill & Den. 556, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-alstyne-v-richmond-nysupct-1843.