Case ID: hill_4/html/0591-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bronson, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Larmon vs. Aiken and another.
    Where a writ of error to the common pleas was brought after June 1st, 1840, though the judgment sought to be reversed was rendered before, held, that the costs upon the writ must be taxed according to the rates established by the act of May 14th, 1840.
    Costs. Aiken and another sued Larmon before a justice, and recovered a judgment. On appeal to the C. P., judgment was again recovered against Larmon prior to June 1st, 1840. After that day, Larmon brought a writ of error in this court, where the judgment was affirmed. The defendants in error taxed their costs on the writ of error at the rates given by the old fee bill.
    
      JV*. Hill, Jr.,
    
    moved for a retaxation on the ground that costs should have been taxed at the rates established by the act of 1840. {Slat. ’40, j). 327.)
    
      H. Z. Hayner, contra,
    said a writ of error was for some purposes a continuation of the original action, and as that was commenced prior to June 1st, 1840, the case was saved from the operation of the act of 1840 by the 38th section.
   By the Court,

Bronson, J.

We think the costs of the writ of error should have been charged and taxed according to the rates established by the act of 1840.

Motion granted.