Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1905

Bowers v. Male

Bowers v. Male
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided February 24, 1905
92 N.Y.S. 183; 102 A.D. 609 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

George Zabriskie, for appellant., C. V. Nellany, for respondents.

Bowers v. Male

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

When the motion was made for an extra allowance, costs of the defendants Messrs. Hinkley and Fitzgerald had not been adjusted, taxed, or noticed for taxation, and, in the judgment as entered by the plaintiff, a vacant space was left wherein they could be entered. It was within the power of the court, therefore, to amend the judgment by permitting, in addition to the costs awarded by the judgment, an extra allowance in such amount as was proper upon the facts.

We think, however, that the amount of the extra allowance was too large, considering the fact that the attorney for these defendants represented other defendants who were unsuccessful, and that the effect would be to take away the entire benefit of the extra allowance awarded to the plaintiff.

The order should accordingly be modified by fixing the amount of the extra allowance of these defendants at $250, and as thus modified it should be affirmed, without costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.