Von Schoning v. Mitchell

The Superior Court of New York City

Von Schoning v. Mitchell

23 How. Pr. 44

The Superior Court of New York City·Decided April 15, 1862·Published

Opinion

Moncrief, Justice.

I think the judgment is irregular in that it gives costs to the defendants. The plaintiff is the prevailing party; the jury found a verdict for the return of the property to him, assessing its value at $40. This entitled the plaintiff to recover at least nominal damages; and section 304 (Code) gives to him the like amount of costs ; the plaintiff being entitled to costs of any amount, the defendant cannot recover costs.

The motion should be granted, with $7 costs.

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

Moncrief, Justice.

I think the judgment is irregular in that it gives costs to the defendants. The plaintiff is the prevailing party; the jury found a verdict for the return of the property to him, assessing its value at $40. This entitled the plaintiff to recover at least nominal damages; and section 304 (Code) gives to him the like amount of costs ; the plaintiff being entitled to costs of any amount, the defendant cannot recover costs.

The motion should be granted, with $7 costs.

Von Schoning v. Mitchell, 23 How. Pr. 44 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1862).

Pincite

23 How. Pr. 44 (Von Schoning v. Mitchell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.