Case ID: sc_21/html/0601-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Chiee Justice Simpson,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 1606.
    Benbow v. Richardson.
    April Term, 1884.
    
      September 13, 1884.
    
      Moise ¿p Huggins, for appellant. No counsel contra.
   Opinion by

Mr. Chiee Justice Simpson,

Order of non-suit being entered in action for the recovery of land, the costs were taxed by the clerk, and on appeal from this taxation Judge Mackey ruled that defendant was entitled only to $10, costs of motion. On appeal this ruling was reversed, the court holding—

• 1. That costs should be taxed under fee-bill of force when non-suit was ordered, and not under fee bill of force when the judgment was entered thereon; citing Kapp Rothschild v. Loyns, 13 S. 0., 288; Lewis v. Brown, 16 8. <7., 58.

2. That in case of a non-suit, the defendant is entitled to the same costs as where trial is had.

3. Whether a plaintiff may bring a second action before the costs of the first are actually paid, reserved.