Case ID: mass_7/html/0390-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      The Court\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Daniel Moore versus John Heald.
    The provision of the statute of 1807, c. 122, § 2, limiting costs to one quarter of the damages recovered in actions commenced in the Common Pleas, where those damages are less than twenty dollars, does not extend to judgments rendered on the report of referees.
    At the last term this action was submitted to the determination of referees, under a rule of this Court. The referees made their report at the present term, in substance that the plaintiff recover ten dollars damage, with costs of Court.
    The report being accepted, the plaintiff moved that full costs be taxed for him, notwithstanding the provisions of the statute of 1807, c. 122, § 2, which enacts that “if, upon any action originally brought before the Court of Common Pleas, judgment shall be recovered for no more than twenty dollars debt or damage, in all such cases the plaintiff shall be entitled for his costs to no more than one quarter part of the debt or damage so recovered.”
   The Court

took time to consider the motion, and the next week, at Wiscasset, gave their opinion that a judgment rendered upon the report of referees is not within the statute, and that the plaintiff, in this action, was entitled to his full costs; and judgment was entered accordingly.