The Minnesotian. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn. Territory) 1851-1852, 1852-01-24
BEFORE HIS HONOR. CHIEF JUSTICE Full
LER.
AT CHAMBERS. January 18th, 1852.
District Court-1st District.
jaime. NJ. Goodhue,)
VS.. Motion for readjusment Of costs.
Louis Roberts.
DECISION.

VS.. Motion for readjustment Of costs.
DECISION.
The plaintiff commenced his action for
the recovery Of over one hundred dol
lars, and the defendant under sec. 8, p.
4lS r. S., served on him an offer to al
low judgment to be taken for seventy
five dollars. The plaintiff insisted before
the clerk of this court, that he was enti-
tied to have inserted in the judgment the
seven dollars costs provided by sec. Z,
sub. l, p. 81, r. S., " for all proceed
ings before notice Of trial, including
judgment when entered" which the de-
fendani opposed on the ground that the
amount Of the recovery was less than
one hundl ed dollars. The clerk refused
to allow it, and the plaintiff now moves
for readiustn.ent of the costs. This he
may do. Pr. Rep. %, 3, Code Rep.
"a: VOORHEES, Pr. 257.
The court has no power 10 grant costs
beyond what is conferred by statute. In
an action for the recovery Of money, TO
which class this belongs, the plaintiff is
entitled to costs where he RECEIVERS one
hundred dollars or more, r. S. $40, sec.
| 2, sub. 4 and not otherwise, unless hi.
case is within the exceptions specified in
that subdivision. Under sec. 5, p. 81,
the court has discretion in allowing or
Withholding costs, g in other actions,"
that is other than those mentioned in the
preceding sections, but not in those ao-
tons.
The statute has conferred no authority
to grant costs to the plaintiff in such an
action as this, where the amount of the
recovery is over fifty and less than one
hundred dollars and the defendant is en-
titled TO them, if the recovery is less
than fifty dollars. r. S. 81, sec. A.
Between those sums, neither party has
them-thc defendant has not, because the
Judgment being against him, and SO large
too, it would be inequilable TO make
the plaintiff pay his own and the defedn-
ants expenses in the suit-the plaintiff
has not, because he ought to have sued in
a Justices court, ard to give him costs,
would encourage him TO evade the law bv
laying his damages at over one hundred
dollars and suing therefor in the district
CONIt, NIcll llS uClIlll I'LL Is less
than that sum-a practice which should
be discountenanced. These are probably
the reasons by which the Legislature was
guided in the construction of the statute.
Why costs are given to the plaintiff in
actions Of assault, battery, false impris-
onment, &C., r. S. $50, sec. 2, sub. d,
and not in other actions for the recovery
of money where the recovery is less than
one hundred dollars, it may at first view
be difficult to conceive. The true reason
undoubtedly is, that the provision in re-
lation to those actions is copied from the
code of New York, where courts of re-
cord are not limited in the amount neces-
sary to confer jurisdiction, and the only
restraint upon bringing suits in them for
the smallest sums, is the loss and payment
of costs, if the plaintiff fails to obtain
Judgment for over fifty dollars and also
that the class of actions referred to, are
excepted from the jurisdiction of justices
courts altogether, and can only be brought
i'll the district courts.
1t would have been well, perhaps, to
encourage the acceptance of offers Of
compromise by the plaintiff, by giving
him costs where his claim is over one
hundred dollars, and he accepts less than
that amount, and it has ccordingly been
done by amendment in the New York
code, sec. 3S5, but it is omitted in our
own.
The motion for readjustment must
therefore be denied.
J. FULLER.
e.