Court Opinion

ID: 9422906
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:05:06.202014+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:39.948444
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Harlan,
with whom Mr. Justice Stewart joins,
dissenting.
The only possible justification for bringing this case here was to settle the question of whether the 100-mile *240subpoena rule deprives a district court of power to tax as costs the traveling expenses of witnesses reasonably brought by the prevailing litigant from places beyond that distance. The Court, however, declines to make any precise holding on this question. The scope of the discretion of a district judge acting within his powers, which is the foundation of today’s decision, is in my opinion a matter which should be left' with the courts of appeals. I would affirm the judgment below for the reasons stated in the opinion of Chief Judge Lumbard for the majority of the Court of Appeals, 324 F. 2d 359.