Yates-Smith Co. v. Doyle

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Yates-Smith Co. v. Doyle

132 N.Y.S. 273

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 22, 1911

StatusPublished

This text of 132 N.Y.S. 273 (Yates-Smith Co. v. Doyle) 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

Yates-Smith Co. v. Doyle, 132 N.Y.S. 273 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is well supported by the evidence and no questions of law are presented. It includes, however, an allowance of $10 motion costs, for which there is apparently no authority. The defendant claims that the costs were allowed erroneously upon the denial of the motion to set aside the judgment.

The formal order denying the motion was entered on June 19th, and contains no provision for costs; but upon the notice of motion the trial justice has indorsed the words, “Motion denied, with $10 costs, May 29th.” The judgment roll also shows that the original judgment was signed on May 26th, and was for the sum of $236.67, and that the words, “Motion costs, June 1, 1911, $10.00,” and a new total of $246.67, were added thereafter. A careful search of the record shows no other order which was granted or denied, with costs. There is no authority in the Municipal Court to impose costs upon the denial of a motion to set aside a judgment.

The judgment must therefore be modified, by striking out the provision of $10 motion costs, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is well supported by the evidence and no questions of law are presented. It includes, however, an allowance of $10 motion costs, for which there is apparently no authority. The defendant claims that the costs were allowed erroneously upon the denial of the motion to set aside the judgment.

The formal order denying the motion was entered on June 19th, and contains no provision for costs; but upon the notice of motion the trial justice has indorsed the words, “Motion denied, with $10 costs, May 29th.” The judgment roll also shows that the original judgment was signed on May 26th, and was for the sum of $236.67, and that the words, “Motion costs, June 1, 1911, $10.00,” and a new total of $246.67, were added thereafter. A careful search of the record shows no other order which was granted or denied, with costs. There is no authority in the Municipal Court to impose costs upon the denial of a motion to set aside a judgment.

The judgment must therefore be modified, by striking out the provision of $10 motion costs, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 N.Y.S. 273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yates-smith-co-v-doyle-nyappterm-1911.