Case Name: Castellanos v. Beauville and others
Court: New York Superior Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1849-11-17
Citations: 2 Sandf. 670
Docket Number: 
Parties: Castellanos v. Beauville and others.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Superior Court of the city of New York
Volume: 4
Pages: 670–671

Head Matter:
Castellanos v. Beauville and others.
Where in trespass, separate defences are made by several defendants, in good faith, and not for costs, each is entitled to a full bill of costs on succeeding in the suit.
Where, after being commenced separately, the defences are united under the same attorney, or are in truth and effect united, during the residue of the suit, there can be but one set of costs for all.
Nov. 17, 1849.
Taxation of costs.—The suit was trespass, against Beau-ville, Samanos, and W. Jones, sheriff. The latter appeared by his attorneys, Messrs. Brown & Matthews, and put in a plea. Beauville and Samanos appeared, and put in a joint plea by W. Skidmore, their attorney. The defence of B. and S. was jointly conducted until the second trial, when Samanos was-acquitted. At that stage of the matter, Brown & Matthews became Beauville’s attorneys, on a substitution for Skidmore, and conducted the suit till its termination in a judgment for all of the defendants. On taxing the costs, a full bill was claimed for each defendant.
Brown & Mathews, for the defendants.
H. P. Hastings, for the plaintiff.

Opinion:
By the Court. Oakley, Ch. J.
The defences of Beauvile and Samanos were conducted by the same attorney, and on the same plea while S. continued in the suit, and there can be only a single bill of costs for both during that period. After that, the defence of Beauville and the sheriff was conducted jointly by the same attorneys for both. It is not the case, therefore, of a separate defence by separate attorneys. There separate bills are allowed, where the defences were so conducted in good faith, and not for costs. Where in truth and in effect the defences have been united, there can be only one bill taxed. The result is, there must be one full bill of costs taxed for the sheriff, and another for Beauville and Samanos, to the period when the sheriff's attorneys became the attorneys for B. No costs will be taxed to B. after that, as there was thereafter one entire defence for him and the sheriff.