Bank of Woodland v. Hiatt (1881) · DecisionDepot

Bank of Woodland v. Hiatt

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Nov 15, 1881 No. No. 8,115Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that upon the reversal of a judgment, an appellant is entitled to recover only the costs and disbursements incurred up to the entry of the original judgment and those specifically incurred by reason of taking the appeal.

Issues

Whether the cost of a reporter's transcript procured for a motion for a new trial is a recoverable cost upon the reversal of a judgment on appeal.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Upon the reversal of the judgment of the District Court, appellant became entitled, in addition to his costs and disbursements paid and incurred up to the entry of the judgment, to recover only such costs and disbursements as he was put to by reason of taking the appeal.”

Synopsis

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of the County of Yolo, retaxing defendant’s costs. Bush, J.

The Court: On the twenty-sixth day of September, 1879, the cause was tried, without a jury, in the late District Court 'of the 'Sixth Judicial District. On the fourteenth day of October, 1879, said Court filed its decision in writing, and ordered judgment to be entered in favor of plaintiff and against defendant, which judgment was accordingly entered on the same day; on the eighteenth day of November, 1879, said defendant gave notice of his intention to move for a new trial in said action; on the twelfth day of October, 1880, said defendant appealed to the Supreme Court of said State from the whole of said judgment, and thereafter such proceedings were had in said Supreme Court, that on the sixteenth day of June, 1881, said judgment was reversed with costs by said Supreme Court, and said cause remanded to the Superior Court of said State, in and for the said Yolo County, with directions to enter judgment on the findings in favor of said defendant; on the twenty-third day of July, 1881, the remit[581]titur of said Supreme Court in said action was filed in the office of the Clerk of said Superior Court, and that on the twenty-fifth day of July, 1881, said Superior Court, in obedience to said judgment of said Supreme Court, entered judgment in said action in favor of said defendant and against said plaintiff for costs. On the twenty-fifth day of July, 1881, said defendant filed and served two memoranda of his costs and disbursements in said action, and upon said appeal, of which the following are copies:

No. 1.

Memorandum of costs and disbursements:

[Title of Court and Cause.]

Sheriff’s fees................................... $19 20

Clerk’s fees.................................. 13 00

Witness’ fees, I. N. Hogden, 2 days, 1 mile........ 4 20

Witness’ fees, J. C. Welch, 2 days, 1 mile.......... 4 20

Witness’ fees, J. D. Lawson, 2 days, 1 mile........ 4 20

Witness’ fees, R. A. Grant, 2 days, 1 mile.......... 4 20

Witness’ fees, G. J. Cole, 2 days, 1 mile............ 4 20

Witness’ fees, A. A. Hoytt, 1 day, 30 miles........ 8 00

Bank of Woodland v. Hiatt

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief