Case Name: The Chester Rolling Mills, Resp't, v. The Vessels " Hopatcong," etc., App'lt; The Phœnix Iron Co., Resp't, v. The Vessels " Hopatcong," etc., App'lt
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1891-12-14
Citations: 41 N.Y. St. Rep. 472
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Chester Rolling Mills, Resp’t, v. The Vessels “ Hopatcong,” etc., App’lt. The Phœnix Iron Co., Resp’t, v. The Vessels “ Hopatcong,” etc., App’lt
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 41
Pages: 472–473

Head Matter:
The Chester Rolling Mills, Resp’t, v. The Vessels “ Hopatcong,” etc., App’lt. The Phœnix Iron Co., Resp’t, v. The Vessels “ Hopatcong,” etc., App’lt
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
Filed December 14, 1891.)
Costs—Vessels—Laws 1862, chap. 482.
An extra allowance may be granted in an action brought under chap. ¿82, Laws 1862. The provisions of the old Code in relation to costs were incorporated in the act by a reference thereto, and the act in that respect was not affected by the repeal of the Code.
Appeals from orders granting an extra allowance of five per cent in each case.
Actions to enforce claims against the vessels under chapter 482, Laws 1862.
Abbett & Schmitt, for app’lt; Harvey Weed, for resp’ts.

Opinion:
Pratt, J.
These proceedings are based upon the act of 1862, and the allowances from which these appeals are brought were such as were authorized by that act
The costs and allowances granted by that act were not set forth bodily in the statute. They were incorporated into it by a reference to the Code of Procedure then in existence, and became a portion of the act as effectually as if they had been set forth in words.
The subsequent repeal of the Code of Procedure did not affect the act of 1862. That stands as it did before.
The allowances made were therefore proper, and are affirmed.
Dykman, J., concurs; Barnard, P. J., not sitting.