Williams v. Wright

1 Wend. 277
New York Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1828·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

By the Court,

Savage, Ch. J.

It is a sufficient answer to this application, that it is not shewn that the defendant has had a bill of costs taxed, which he can claim to be set off. But had he obtained his bill to be taxed, he would not have been entitled to set it off against the plaintiff’s costs in this case. The application is made on the supposition, that the defendant having prevailed on one of the issues of law, is entitled to the costs of that issue. This is not so. The party prevailing on the whole record, is alone entitled to costs. Here the plaintiff has prevailed: he obtained a verdict on the second and third counts of his declaration, which were for the same property claimed in the first count, and has entered his judgment accordingly. The rule is, if there be two counts, and an issue of law be joined on one, and an issue of fact on the other, if the defendant succeed upon the demurrer, and the plaintiff upon the issue in fact, the plaintiff shall have his costs on the issue in fact, but the defendant shall not have his costs on the issue in law. (2 Burr. 1232. 5 East, 264. 2 Archb. Pr. 286.)

Motion denied.

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

Williams v. Wright, 1 Wend. 277 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1828).

1 Wend. 277 (Williams v. Wright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cassavoy v. Pattison
101 A.D. 128 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1905)
Boyd v. Commonwealth
77 Va. 52 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1883)
Hathaway v. Roach
11 F. Cas. 818 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts, 1846)
Duffy v. People
6 Hill & Den. 75 (Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, 1843)
Osborne v. Lawrence
9 Wend. 445 (New York Supreme Court, 1832)
Wright v. Williams
2 Wend. 632 (New York Supreme Court, 1829)