Case Name: DICK v. LEONORI
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1912-06-13
Citations: 135 N.Y.S. 1045
Docket Number: 
Parties: DICK v. LEONORI.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 135
Pages: 1045–1045

Head Matter:
DICK v. LEONORI.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
June 13, 1912.)
Pleading (§ 239*)—Amendment—Conditions—Costs.
Upon an order vacating a judgment in favor of defendant, after a trial and appeal taken therefrom, and granting the plaintiff leave to amend his complaint, the court should impose full costs to the date of , the amendment, together with the costs of the motion.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Pleading, Cent. Dig. §§ 626-635; Dec. Dig. § 239.*]
•For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r indexes
Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.
Action by James Dick against Charles L. Leonori. From so much of an order of the City Court of the City of New York as imposed only $20 costs as a condition of vacating a judgment in favor of defendant, after a trial and appeal taken therefrom, and granting the plaintiff leave to amend his complaint, defendant appeals. Modified and affirmed.
Argued June term, 1912, before SEABURY, LEHMAN, and BI-JUR, JJ.
Forster, Hotaling & Klenke, of New York City,, for appellant.
Philip Carpenter, of New York City, for respondent.

Opinion:
BIJUR, J.
Under the circumstances disclosed by the record in this case, full costs to date, together with $10 costs of the motion, should have been imposed. Purcell v. Hoffman House, 131 App. Div. 239, 115 N. Y. Supp. 778; Palazzo v. Degnon-McLean Contracting Co., 115 App. Div. 172, 100 N. Y. Supp. 681; Dunham v. Hastings Co., 109 App. Div. 514, 96 N. Y. Supp. 313.
The order appealed from is modified, by imposing full costs, together with $10 motion costs, and, as so modified, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.