Case Name: MANHATTAN RY. CO. et al. v. KENT et al.
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1894-10-12
Citations: 30 N.Y.S. 959
Docket Number: 
Parties: MANHATTAN RY. CO. et al. v. KENT et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 30
Pages: 959–959

Head Matter:
(80 Hun, 559.)
MANHATTAN RY. CO. et al. v. KENT et al.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.
October 12, 1894.)
«COMDBMNATION PROCEEDINGS—COSTS—TRIAL FEE.
Proceedings before commissioners appointed to assess the compensation is not a trial within Code Civ. Proc. § 3372, providing for the allowance of a trial fee.
Appeal from special term, New York county.
Proceeding by the Manhattan Railway Company and another ■against Julia A. Kent, individually and as trustee, and others, to . condemn easements appurtenant to premises known as numbers 1, 3, and 5, New Bowery, in the city of New York. The facts fully appear in the preceding case, which was an appeal by petitioners from an award of costs in favor of defendants. This is an appeal ■by defendants from an order denying their motion for a retaxation of costs. The items disallowed in defendants’ bill of costs were as follows: Trial fee, issue of fact, $30; allowance by statute, $60; trial, occupying more than two days, $10; copy stenographer’s minutes, $19.60,—$119.60.
Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and O’BRIEN and FOLLETT, JJ.
A. B. Cruikshank, for appellants.
William H. Godden, for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The proceedings before the condemnation commissioners were not the trial contemplated by the statute. Such proceedings were a mere assessment of damages. The trial spoken of in the statute is that which takes place preliminary to the appointment of commissioners.
The order appealed from should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.