Case Name: David Ramsay and others, vs. Robert Marsh and others, defendants in separate suits
Court: Constitutional Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1824-11
Citations: 1 Harp. 472
Docket Number: 
Parties: David Ramsay and others, vs. Robert Marsh and others, defendants in separate suits.
Judges: Johnson, Huger, Richardson, and JYott, Justices, concurred
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 472–474

Head Matter:
David Ramsay and others, vs. Robert Marsh and others, defendants in separate suits.
JB'y agreement of counsel, commission to take testimony was issued, to be used in several cases':' held that the costs- of it could be taxed but in one of the Cases.
Cost's of “ special matter and agreementallowed in cases where the issues were made up, though afterwards discontinued.
The question in this case arose upon a motion of Plaintiff's attorney, to strike out of the bill, of costs two items: first, “ a commission” in each case, which was taxed by the clerk for the defendant’s attorney; and second, “ special matter and argument” which ivas taxed in like manner. It appeared to the court, that by consent between the counsel and to accommodate the plaintiff’s attorney, it was agreed that but one commission should issue, to be entitled of all the cases and to be read in evidence in all. His honor decided that under these circumstances the commission was correctly taxed in each case.
From this decision the plaintiffs- appealed and moved to have the same reversed on the ground, that the allowance of £2 to the attorney for each commission, was intended by the legislature as a compensation for his actual trouble, and that therefore the taxation alone in these cases was contrary to law.-
It appeared that in the case against Marsh, the order of nonsuit was confirmed by the constitutional court, at the spring sitting, 1822, and that in all the other cases pleas were filed, issues made up and the cases marked “ discontinued” on- the issue docket, at October term, 1822. The defendants also appealed on the grounds:
1st. Because under the circumstances of the case, the taxation should not have been opened:
2d. Because the item of special matter and argument was properly allowed, and should not have been stricken out:

Opinion:
The opinion of the court ivas delivered by
Mr. Justice Colcock. .
Under the circumstances of these cases, the agreement of the counsel to make one commission ansiver for all the cases was a, very proper one; as a recovery on the part of the plaintiff would no doubt have rendered it unnecessary in the other cases 1o go again into his title, and one commission would have been held sufficient by the court. One only therefore can be pro* .perly charged, and the £2 charged, in all the cases not tried, must be stricken out-.
As to the second charge, it has been the established practice to allow it in all cases, not within the summary jurisdiction, where the issue has been made up, and therefore those charges may be allowed — in all the cases where issue was regularly made up and the cases docketted. The motions are granted.
Johnson, Huger, Richardson, and JYott, Justices, concurred